John R. Houk
© September 16, 2013
I received an email from the Historical and Investigative Research (HIR). The purpose of the email is to spread information on a fifteen minute documentary “The Nazi’s and the Palestinian movement”. I have known about this information on this so-called Palestinian movement for some time. Incredulously too many Americans are completely out of touch of the Nazi-Radical Islamic cooperation that began in WWII. You have to ask, “What in the world did Aryan-Nazi Supremacists and Muslim-Arabic (of a Semitic language group) have in common?”
Of course the answer is JEW-HATRED. Islam has never been Jew-friendly especially since old Mo conquered Medina and began the execution of Arab-Jewish tribes of the Arabian Peninsula. Jew-hatred became elevated among Arab Muslims largely at the Nazi support of the WWII Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Hajj Amin al Husseini. Al-Husseini propagandized Jew-Hatred because European Jews had begun flooding back into their ancestral homeland largely with initial British help – See HERE and HERE (sadly the British transitioned to a pro-Arab stand by the time Israel proclaimed their independence in 1948).
So this is what is going to happen in this post. I am going to begin with the email which has two links. One to the documentary which is linked on Vimeo and the second link is to the HIR text. I am going to use a Youtube version of the Vimeo link because it is easier to post on my blogs. On the HIR text link there is a side panel which you will have to go to the website to read. I am just cross posting the text pertaining to “The Nazi’s and the Palestinian movement”.
HIR: New Documentary: The Nazis and the Palestinian Movement
Sent by Francisco Gil-White
From Historical and Investigative Research
Sent: Aug 6, 2013 at 11:07 PM
The Israeli government is negotiating to give PLO/Fatah (the ‘Palestinian Authority’) the strategic territories of Judea and Samaria. This is only possible because ordinary Israelis, and ordinary Westerners, still don’t know about the German Nazi roots of PLO/Fatah.
FACES/HIR has produced:
1) A (short) new documentary about this question, available on Vimeo:
2) An article to accompany the video (it contains all the relevant documentation): http://www.hirhome.com/israel/nazis_palestinians.htm
Please give both a wide circulation
HISTORICAL AND INVESTIGATIVE RESEARCH
F.A.C.E.S. (Foundation for the Analysis of Conflict, Ethnic and Social)
Posted by jomjomnl
Published on Aug 20, 2013
THE NAZIS AND THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT
Documentary and discussion
By Francisco Gil-White
26 July 2013
Hajj Amin al Husseini is the father of the Palestinian Movement. He created PLO/Fatah (now better known as the ‘Palestinian Authority’), the organization that will govern any future Palestinian state. And he was mentor to Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, the leaders of that organization. Husseini was also, during World War II, a top Nazi leader who co-directed with Adolf Eichmann the death camp system that murdered between 5 and 6 million European Jews, also known as the Final Solution. These facts are not widely known or understood. Neither has their implication for our understanding of Israeli ruling elite behavior been properly appreciated. We present a short documentary and a discussion.
Table of Contents
For many years now, almost every day, all over the world, the Arab-Israeli conflict is headline news. And yet most people still don’t know that PLO/Fatah (now better known as the ‘Palestinian Authority’), the organization that will govern any future Palestinian state, was created by a top leader of the German Nazi Final Solution. In other words, the ‘Palestinian state’—to be carved out of strategic territory of the Jewish state—will be governed by the spawn of the man responsible for the Nazi murder of between 5 and 6 million European Jews.
The short documentary below explains PLO/Fatah’s history.
This documentary is now on Vimeo, but it was first uploaded to You Tube. In the first two days, almost with no publicity, the You Tube webpage quickly logged more than 1,500 visits. Then, on the third day, Israelis began reporting that You Tube was not allowing them to access the video. You Tube’s explanation is that when a video is blocked in this manner it can be due to only one of two reasons:
1) the You Tube account-owner placed country restrictions on the video; or else
2) You Tube is complying with local laws
We did not place country restrictions on the video. That leaves us with the second possibility.
But what local laws can You Tube be complying with? To my knowledge, no laws have yet been passed by the Israeli Knesset against the dissemination of historical facts.
Some have speculated that “we are complying with local laws” is a cover for “the Israeli government told us to block it.” Others ask: “But why would the Israeli government even want to block this video?”
Let us consider the following:
1) PLO/Fatah—created by a leader of the Final Solution—was brought inside the Jewish state—created (supposedly) to protect the Jewish people from Final Solutions—because the Israeli government signed the 1993-94 Oslo Accord.
2) But why? In 1982 Menachem Begin had already (essentially) destroyed PLO/Fatah and chased the remnant out of Lebanon to its new base in Tunis. So in 1993-94 the Israeli government was breathing new life into a defeated, moribund PLO/Fatah.
3) In doing so the Israeli government gifted PLO/Fatah with its most important victory: legitimacy on the world stage, and lordship over the Arab Muslims in the strategic ‘disputed territories’ of Judea and Samaria.
4) The Israeli government did all this this without informing ordinary Israelis about the roots of PLO/Fatah in the German Nazi Final Solution. Instead, it legitimized PLO/Fatah’s claim to have abandoned terrorism for ‘peace.’
5) With PLO/Fatah’s entry, terrorism against Israelis immediately quintupled, and the security situation worsened for the long term because PLO/Fatah has been indoctrinating the Arab Muslims in the disputed territories into its ecstatic genocidal ideology (not precisely a secret).
6) The Israeli government is still trying to sell the Israeli people—and Jews worldwide—on the idea that a sensible solution to Israel’s security woes is to give the strategic high ground of Judea and Samaria (a.k.a. the ‘West Bank’) to PLO/Fatah.
7) There is a real possibility that the Israeli government will make this strategic territory judenrein (this is a German Nazi term meaning ‘cleansed of Jews’) for PLO/Fatah. They already did it in Gaza.
8) During the long years since the so-called Oslo ‘Peace’ Process began, the Israeli government still hasn’t informed the Israelis about PLO/Fatah’s origins in the German Nazi Final Solution.
But perhaps the most important points are the following:
9) This Oslo ‘Peace’ Process could have been quickly killed in its tracks if, when the US government first began bullying for it, the prime minister of Israel had simply called an international press conference to explain the origins of PLO/Fatah in the German Nazi Final Solution.
10) At any point since 1993-94, by holding such a press conference, the Israeli government could have scored a major propaganda victory in favor of Israeli Jews, and in favor of ejecting PLO/Fatah from Israel. But no such press conference has yet been called.
On the basis of the above 10 points one may conclude that, if the information in this video becomes widely known, those running the Israeli government will have some egg on their faces. In fact, this information raises the sharpest questions about them, and about their intentions. Here then is a plausible motive for the Israeli government to block the video: to stop Israelis from asking such questions.
But in fact questions must be asked not merely about the Israeli government (in the narrow bureaucratic sense) but also about the Israeli ruling elite more broadly. For none of the major politicians who declare themselves opponents of the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process and its ‘Two State Solution’ have educated Israelis about the German Nazi Roots of PLO/Fatah. Why?
The video follows below. And below the video is a discussion about the evidence it presents, and how this evidence has been either ignored or lied about for many years.
Immediately after the war, Husseini’s Nazi activities were well understood, as the article from The Nation (1947) which I have posted to the right of this column attests. But then a tremendous silence about Husseini and his Nazi years developed. Certainly the media, which displays always the latest news on the Arab-Israeli conflict in its front pages, has had nothing to say about the Nazi origins of PLO/Fatah ever since PLO/Fatah was created in the 1960s. The silence in academia has been equally deafening.
Historian Rafael Medoff, in an article from 1996, wrote the following:
“Early scholarship on the Mufti, such as the work of Maurice Pearlman and Joseph Schechtman, while hampered by the inaccessibility of some key documents, at least succeeded in conveying the basic facts of the Mufti’s career as a Nazi collaborator. One would have expected the next generation of historians, with greater access to relevant archival materials (not to mention the broader perspective that the passage of time may afford) to improve upon the work of their predecessors. Instead, however, a number of recent histories of the Arab-Israeli conflict have played fast and loose with the evidence, producing accounts that minimize or even justify the Mufti’s Nazi activity.”
What Medoff refers to above as “early scholarship on the Mufti” is early indeed. The work of Pearlman and Schechtman that he cites is from 1947 and 1965:
Pearlman, M. (1947). Mufti of Jerusalem: The story of Haj Amin el Husseini. London: V Gollancz.
Joseph B. Schechtman, The Mufti and the Fuehrer, New York, 1965.
After this ensued a tremendous academic silence on the Mufti Husseini. In fact, Medoff can refer us to no academic work on Husseini before 1990. His article, recall, is from 1996. The few academic mentions of Husseini that he could find from 1990 to 1996 were either completely silent on the Mufti’s Nazi years—as if they had never happened—or else they relegated a ‘summary’ of those years to a single paragraph (or even just a sentence) that left almost everything out. Some authors even claimed (entirely in passing) that Husseini’s Nazi activities had been supposedly imagined by “Zionist propagandists.”
But recent scholars who have studied Hajj Amin al Husseini in depth, such as Rafael Medoff, have confirmed what his early biographers had already established:
1) that Husseini traveled to Berlin in late 1941, met with Hitler, and discussed with him the extermination of the Middle Eastern Jews (whom Husseini had already been killing for some 20 years);
2) that Husseini spent the entire war in Nazi-controlled Europe as a Nazi collaborator;
3) that Husseini helped spread Nazi propaganda to Muslims worldwide (one of his famous exhortations goes like this: “Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.”);
4) that Husseini recruited thousands of Bosnian and Kosovo Muslims to Heinrich Himmler’s SS, who went on to kill hundreds of thousands of Serbs, and tens of thousands of Jews and Roma (‘Gypsies’).
It is beyond dispute that Husseini did all that. And in fact photographic evidence of Husseini’s Nazi collaboration abounds on the internet.
But there has been quite an effort to whitewash Husseini’s responsibility in the German Nazi death camp system specifically—in other words, his responsibility in the Holocaust, or as the Jews more properly say, in the Shoah (‘Catastrophe’). One example of this whitewashing effort is Wikipedia’s page on Husseini.
Because of its emblematic nature, I shall now quote from the Wikipedia article on Hajj Amin al Husseini as I found it on 14 July, 2013 and then comment.
[Quote from Wikipedia begins here]
Al-Husseini settled in Berlin in late 1941 and resided there for most of the war. Various sources have repeated allegations, mostly ungrounded in documentary evidence, that he visited the death camps of Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka and Mauthausen. At the Nuremberg trials, one of Adolf Eichmann‘s deputies, Dieter Wisliceny, stated that al-Husseini had actively encouraged the extermination of European Jews, and that he had had an elaborate meeting with Eichmann at his office, during which Eichmann gave him an intensive look at the current state of the “Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe” by the Third Reich. Most of these allegations are completely unfounded.
[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]
Consider first the phrase “completely unfounded” as it attaches to any part of Wisliceny’s Nuremberg testimony.
As part of the legal proceedings at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, two independent witnesses (Andrej or Endre Steiner and Rudolf Kasztner)—both of whom had had personal contact with Dieter Wisliceny during the war—reported to the Tribunal that in wartime conversations with Wisliceny he had said certain things about Husseini’s role in the Final Solution (the genocidal enterprise in which Wisliceny was not just anybody but a highly-placed administrator). The Steiner and Kasztner testimonies are quite similar to each other. Before his execution for crimes against humanity, Nuremberg Tribunal investigators called on Wisliceny to either confirm or deny what these two independent witnesses had said. Wisliceny did correct them on minor points but he confirmed what they had both stated concerning Husseini’s central and originating role in the extermination program (consult footnote  to read the Steiner and Kasztner testimonies).
So are these “completely unfounded” allegations? If so, that would mean:
1) that in light of other, better established evidence, what Wisliceny stated is impossible; and/or
2) that Wisliceny is less credible as a witness than witnesses who contradicted his statements.
So I ask: On the basis of what evidence do the Wikipedia editors argue that “most of these allegations are completely unfounded”?
At first it seems as though Wikipedia editors have provided three sources but on closer inspection it is the same footnote, repeated three times (in the space of four sentences). The footnote contains this:
Gerhard Höpp (2004). “In the Shadow of the Moon.” In Wolfgang G. Schwanitz. Germany and the Middle East 1871–1945. Markus Wiener, Princeton. pp. 217–221.
The title is incomplete. Gerhard Höpp’s article is: “In the Shadow of the Moon: Arab Inmates in Nazi Concentration Camps.” The full title makes it obvious that this article is not about Husseini, something that readers who see only the truncated title in the Wikipedia reference will not realize.
But, anyway, what does Höpp say—entirely in passing—about Wisliceny’s testimony concerning Husseini? He says this (and only this):
“Al-Husaini… is said not only to have had knowledge of the concentration camps but also to have visited them. Various authors speak of the camps at Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka, and Mauthausen. While the assumption that he visited the Auschwitz camp in the company of Adolf Eichmann is supported by an affidavit of Rudolf Kasztner, referring to a note by the Eichmann collaborator Dieter Wisliceny, the other allegations are entirely unfounded.” (p.221)
Recall that Höpp is Wikipedia’s thrice-cited source to ‘support’ that “most” of the following three allegations are “completely unfounded”:
1) that Husseini visited death camps
2) that Husseini encouraged the extermination of the Jews;
3) that Husseini met with Eichmann to discuss said extermination.
But notice that Höpp says absolutely nothing about allegations 2 and 3.
And notice that, concerning allegation 1, Höpp uses the phrase “entirely unfounded” in a manner exactly opposite to the Wikipedia editors who invoke him. For the Wikipedia editors, “most” of what Wisliceny says is “completely unfounded,” whereas for Höpp it is those allegations not backed by Wisliceny’s testimony that he considers “entirely unfounded.”
Moreover, Höpp states:
“Speculation on this and other misdeeds by the Mufti appear unnecessary in view of his undisputed collaboration with the Nazis…” (p.221)
In other words, since we already know that Husseini was a rabid anti-Semite who himself organized mass killings of Jews before he met the Nazis, and then also with the Nazis, and discussed with Hitler the extermination of the Middle Eastern Jews, and shouted on the Nazi radio “Kill the Jews wherever you find them,” is it not a waste of time to argue back and forth whether Husseini did or did not visit this or that death camp with Eichmann?
But, I might add, why doubt it? And why doubt that such a man encouraged the Nazis to exterminate the European Jews and also met with Eichmann to discuss this program? (Unless, of course, such expressions of doubt are intended as an apology for the Mufti…)
Let us now continue with the Wikipedia article:
[Quote from Wikipedia continues here]
A single affidavit by Rudolf Kastner reported that Wisliceny told him that he had overheard Husseini say he had visited Auschwitz incognito in Eichmann’s company. Eichmann denied this at his trial in Jerusalem in 1961. …Eichmann stated that he had only been introduced to al-Husseini during an official reception, along with all other department heads. In the final judgement [sic], the Jerusalem court stated: “In the light of this partial admission by the Accused, we accept as correct Wisliceny’s statement about this conversation between the Mufti and the Accused. In our view it is not important whether this conversation took place in the Accused’s office or elsewhere. On the other hand, we cannot determine decisive findings with regard to the Accused on the basis of the notes appearing in the Mufti’s diary which were submitted to us.” Hannah Arendt, who attended the complete Eichmann trial, concluded in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil that, “The trial revealed only that all rumours about Eichmann’s connection with Haj Amin el Husseini, the former Mufti of Jerusalem, were unfounded.”
[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]
I am confounded by Wikipedia’s choice of reliable experts. The Jerusalem court that tried Eichmann for Crimes Against Humanity concluded that “we accept as correct Wisliceny’s statement about this conversation between the Mufti [Husseini] and the Accused [Eichmann]” (the topic of which was to discuss how to exterminate the European Jews); but Wikipedia editors prefer the contrary opinion of philosopher Hannah Arendt, according to whom any claim of a relationship between Husseini and Eichmann is “unfounded.” And why do they prefer Arendt? Because she “attended the complete Eichmann trial.”
Didn’t the judges also attend?
Anyway, let’s look at Arendt more closely. To her, two independent testimonies at Nuremberg concerning Husseini’s relationship with Eichmann, later corroborated by Wisliceny, a highly-placed eyewitness, are “rumours.” This is strange. And, against this, Arendt simply accepts Eichmann’s denial. Doubly strange. Why has Eichmann earned so much respect from Hannah Arendt?
But more to the point: Do we have reasons to consider Eichmann a more credible witness than Wisliceny?
Arendt shouldn’t think so. She wrote Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil so that she could extend herself in deep ruminations about the human soul based on (odd choice) Eichmann’s strange behavior at trial, which led her to call him a “clown.” Wisliceny, by contrast, was universally considered by prosecutors as a very careful witness, who was painstaking in correcting the smallest details in the testimony he was asked to comment on.
(And Eichmann most certainly had motive to lie in order to diminish Husseini’s role in the Holocaust relative to his own, for he was obviously proud of what he had done. Moreover, Husseini was still at large, and busy organizing the ‘Palestinian’ movement, so better not to say anything that could support a manhunt plus extradition procedures that might derail Husseini’s ongoing effort to exterminate the Jews in Israel, a project certainly dear to Eichmann’s putrefacient heart, a project that, as he sat in the witness box, no doubt swam before his mind’s eye as a pleasant future outcome to engulf those sitting in judgment of him, or their children.)
Let us continue:
[Quote from Wikipedia continues here]
Rafael Medoff concludes that “actually there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”
[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]
Rafael Medoff is expressing an opinion. Is it reasonable? Here is the full passage in Medoff’s article:
“With regard to the crucial question of what the Mufti knew and when he knew it, the evidence requires especially careful sifting, and earlier scholars did not always take sufficient care. Pearlman, for example, accepted as fact the unfounded postwar claim by Wisliceny that the Mufti was “one of the initiators” of the genocide. Of course, Pearlman was writing in 1946-1947, when the genesis of the annihilation process was not yet fully understood. Other accounts at that time, such as a 1947 book written by Bartley Crum, a member of the Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry on Palestine, likewise accepted Wisliceny’s claim. Schechtman, writing in 1964-1965, should have known better. He made much of the fact that the Mufti first arrived in Berlin shortly before the Wannsee conference, as if the decision to slaughter the Jews was made at Wannsee, when in fact the mass murder began in Western Russia the previous summer (at a time when the Mufti was still deeply embroiled in the pro-Nazi coup in Baghdad). Schechtman eventually conceded that ‘it would be both wrong and misleading to assume that the presence of Haj Amin el-Husseini was the sole, or even the major factor in the shaping and intensification of the Nazi ‘final solution of the Jewish problem,’ which supplanted forced emigration by wholesale extermination.’ Actually, there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”
Medoff’s argument turns on a semantic point. If we agree with him that the mass killings of Jews on the Nazi Eastern front, which began before Husseini arrived in Berlin, are part of the ‘Final Solution,’ then Husseini is not “one of the originators” of the ‘Final Solution.’ But the question is not what we agree to call ‘Final Solution.’ The question is whether the Nazis had yet decided, before Husseini alighted in Berlin, to create a death camp system to kill all of the European Jews. They had not. And that decision was formalized at Wannsee, indeed shortly after Husseini arrived in Berlin.
Consider what historians say about the established chronology of changes in Nazi policy on the so-called ‘Jewish Question.’
Gunnar Paulsson explains that “expulsion”—not extermination—“had initially been the general policy of the Nazis towards the Jews.” Tobias Jersak writes: “Since the 1995 publication of Michael Wildt’s documentation on the SS’s Security Service (Sicherheitsdienst SD) and the ‘Jewish Question,’ it has been undisputed that from 1933 Nazi policy concerning the ‘Jewish Question’ aimed at the emigration of all Jews, preferably to Palestine.” Even after the conquest of Poland, writes Paulsson, “Jewish emigration continued to be permitted and even encouraged, while other expulsion plans were considered.” Christopher Simpson points out that, though many Jews were being murdered, and people such as Reinhard Heydrich of the SS pushed for wholesale extermination, “other ministries” disagreed, and these favored “deportation and resettlement,” though they disagreed about where to put the Jews and how much terror to apply to them. And so, “until the autumn of 1941,” conclude Marrus & Paxton, “no one defined the final solution with precision, but all signs pointed toward some vast and as yet unspecified project of mass emigration.”
Hajj Amin al Husseini arrived in Berlin in “the autumn of 1941”—to be precise, on 9 November 1941. So yes, there had already been mass killings of Jews on the Eastern front, but for the hypothesis that Husseini had something to do with the Nazi decision to set up the death camp system in order to kill every last living European Jew (instead of sending most to ‘Palestine’), Husseini arrived right on time.
The last part of Medoff’s passage—the one that Wikipedia quotes—is especially problematic. He writes:
“Actually, there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”
Medoff disparages the evidence we have as “hearsay.” Is it?
Wikipedia explains the legal definition of ‘hearsay’:
“information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience.”
In US law there is a famous “hearsay rule,” which says that if en (sic) eyewitness cannot present his or her testimony in court, then another’s report of the supposed testimony is inadmissible.[11a] Medoff is turning this legal tradition into a historiographical principle in order to do away with the evidence from Wisliceny. Is this a proper maneuver?
A historian is not subject to the caution of a court of law, which must err on the side of presumption of innocence in order to safeguard a person’s rights. But even if a historian were Medoff’s reasoning does not apply. We have two independent testimonies before the Nuremberg Tribunal, by Andrej (Endre) Steiner and Rudolf Kasztner, about their wartime conversations with Wisliceny, the topic of which was Husseini’s key role in 1) the decision to exterminate all of the European Jews and, 2) the administration of the death-camp system with Adolf Eichmann. These two testimonies, by themselves, count as ‘hearsay.’ But are they inadmissible? Actually the hearsay rule has exceptions that a judge may invoke, and having two consistent and independent testimonies could favor such an exception. But this is not even the case. Both testimonies were corroborated by Wisliceny, whose “direct experience” of the relationship between Husseini and Eichmann is well established, since Wisliceny was Eichmann’s right-hand man. In other words, Wisliceny’s testimony is not hearsay; he is an eyewitness. Medoff is wrong.
1) we do have evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor;
2) this evidence is not hearsay because it comes from Wisliceny; and
3) given what we know about Husseini’s character, deeds, and timely arrival in Berlin, Wisliceny’s claims certainly do not conflict “with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”
So every word in the Medoff passage that Wikipedia quotes is false.
[Quote from Wikipedia continues here]
Bernard Lewis also called Wisliceny’s testimony into doubt: “There is no independent documentary confirmation of Wisliceny’s statements, and it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from the outside.”
[Quote from Wikipedia ends here]
The full passage from Bernard Lewis’s work is the following:
“According to Wisliceny, the Mufti was a friend of Eichmann and had, in his company, gone incognito to visit the gas chamber at Auschwitz. Wisliceny even names the Mufti as being the ‘initiator’ of the policy of extermination. This was denied, both by Eichmann at his trial in Jerusalem in 1961, and by the Mufti in a press conference at about the same time. There is no independent documentary confirmation of Wisliceny’s statements, and it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from outside.” 
So Eichmann and Husseini deny it and this is enough for Lewis… If we apply his standards to any ordinary criminal investigation we will be forced to let the main suspect go the minute he himself and/or his alleged accomplice deny the charges. Presto! This will save a lot of unnecessary police work.
The same can be said for his curious insistence that without “independent documentary confirmation” the testimony of witnesses can be dispensed with. But, naturally, a great many things that happen in the world are not recorded in a document. Eyewitness testimony must be considered carefully, but saying that “there is no independent documentary confirmation” of a particular piece of testimony is not the same thing as producing good reasons to doubt it. And to say, in the absence of conflicting evidence, that our null hypothesis will be to consider as true the opposite of what was testified to, why that is simply absurd.
The above is obvious but Lewis’s last argument—“it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from outside”—will appeal to many as reasonable, so it deserves a more extended comment.
What Lewis is saying is that the Nazis decided on total extermination for reasons that were ‘endogenous’ to their ideological program. But though killing lots of Jews as part of a campaign of terror and to make lebensraum for deserving Aryan specimens on the Eastern front was certainly part of general Nazi policy, the ‘Final Solution,’ as pointed out above, was initially and for a long time a program of mass expulsion, and did not contemplate (yet) exterminating the entire European Jewish population. Getting to that point required some ‘exogenous’ prodding (“from outside”); it was not an ideological requirement.
Historian Thomas Marrus writes: “After the riots of Kristallnacht in November 1938, SS police boss Heydrich was ordered to accelerate emigration, and Jews were literally driven out of the country. The problem was, of course, that there was practically no place for them to go.” The reason there was no place for them to go is that no country would receive them. As historian James Carroll points out: “The same leaders, notably Neville Chamberlain and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who had denounced the anti-Jewish violence of the Nazis declined to receive Jews as refugees. …Crucial to its building to a point of no return was Hitler’s discovery (late) of the political indifference of the democracies to the fate of the Jews…” Though one may argue that this was not really “indifference” on the part of Roosevelt et al. but a very special interest (in their doom). The main point here is that, as historian Gunnar Paulsson points out: “Expulsion had initially been the general policy of the Nazis towards the Jews, and had been abandoned largely for practical, not ideological, reasons” (my emphasis).
The Nazis were right bastards. No disagreement. But they did need some encouragement to go that far. They needed to be told, first, that they would not get rid of any Jews by pushing them out to the ‘Free World.’ And then they needed to be told, by British creation Hajj Amin al Husseini, that neither could they push them out to ‘Palestine.’ Bernard Lewis is wrong.
Perhaps Wikipedia would like to try again with a new set of ‘supporting’ sources? We will be waiting to examine them.
[SlantRight Editor: There is more reading under the headings “Readings Relevant to this Video” and “Footnotes and Further Reading”.]
Know your Nazi-Arab Connection to Jew-Hatred
John R. Houk
© September 16, 2013
THE NAZIS AND THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT
Francisco Gil-White has a Masters in Social Sciences from the University of Chicago and a PhD in biological and cultural anthropology from UCLA. His PhD thesis work was in rural Western Mongolia, where he did 14 months of fieldwork studying the mutual ethnic perceptions of neighboring Torguud Mongol and Kazakh nomadic herders. Until June 2006, he was Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania (he was fired for investigating the real aims of US foreign policy). His research is broadly concerned with the evolution of the proximate mechanisms responsible for social learning and social perception and cognition. His main interests are the evolution of ethnic processes, with a special focus on racism, and particularly anti-Semitism; prestige processes; the evolution of language; the structure of narrative memory; the structure and interaction of media and political processes; the laws of history; Western geopolitics; and the political history of the West.
John R. Houk
© July 26, 2013
The spirit of Adolf Hitler has risen from the grave and infused itself into the European Union (EU). The EU’s current economic war against Israel is reprehensible. If the EU sanctions achieve the desired result it will set Israel up for the Second Holocaust as Islamic Terrorist organizations, a sovereign Palestine, Lebanon (under Hezbollah control), whoever wins the Syrian civil war, Egypt, Iran and maybe Jordan to obliterate a near defenseless Israel in killing millions of Jews in the process. Caroline Glick has not drawn my conclusions, but if you read her article I believe you will form a similar conclusion unless you stick your head in the sand. O yeah, Obama must be on board with the EU. Obama has sent Secretary of State John Kerry to reopen Israel-PA negotiations. I have no doubts that Kerry is using the EU sanctions as a weapon in an attempt to force Israel to bend to the will of the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians.
John R. Houk
© July 17, 2013
You know the Mainstream Media is primarily Leftist in its worldview, right? You know that the Democratic Party is not even close to the projected image of a reputation as the Party of the People, right? You know that Leftists blame Israel’s existence for all the violence projected toward the West, right? You know that Left influenced Western nations – including the USA’s Left Wing government – have joined together to force Israel to give up more of their ancestral land to placate a group of Arabs that were self-proclaimed as Palestinians ONLY in the 1960s under the influence of Jew-Hating Muslim Arab nations under the guise of theopolitical Islamic Supremacism. These Arab nations had no intention of creating a “Palestinian State,” you know that right? From 1948 through 1967 the goal of Arab nations surrounding the rebirthed nation Israel was to destroy it and divvy up the land between the biggest Arab military dogs bordering Israel; viz. Egypt, Jordan and Syria, you know that right?
Under the illusion of “land for peace” the UN, the EU, the USA and Russia are placing unreported (in America anyway) diplomatic arm twisting to force Israel to give up Judea-Samaria (aka West Bank) and the eastern half of the Holy City Jerusalem – which by the way contains the huge wall remnants of the ancient Jewish Temple – to a group of Arabs that really have no ancestral ties to the ancient land of Israel. There are NO Palestinians. There are Arabs that are descendants of refugees that awaited invading Arab armies to kill the Jews and claim the land as conquest in the same way Islam has done for over 1500 years.
Therein lies the real Middle Eastern problem: Islamic holy writings call for Jihad to expel any infidel that has retaken land once conquered by Muslim armies. God help us! That includes that miniscule amount of land that is only a fraction of Israel’s ancestry. Islam must destroy Israel because its existence is an effrontery and insult to Allah and the false-deity’s prophet Mohammed. And if you watch the news YOU KNOW how Muslims react when they believe their deity and prophet have been maligned by non-Muslims. Muslims go hog-wild in rampages of destruction and death against the closest symbols of the West or the unfortunate non-Muslims (mostly Christians) living in Muslim dominated lands.
I am on the Prophecy Update email list. Prophecy Update delivers current events to your inbox relating to the End Times. Below I am posting a couple of news articles in the 7/17/13 email update. Just as an aside there is more to Prophecy Update than just current events. There is also eschatological articles and Biblical tools to purchase. You may not agree with all the End Times outlook that Prophecy Update ministers; nonetheless there is enough there that should wet the whistle of every Christian looking for the Return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Excerpted from Prophecy Update
Sent: July 17, 2013 11:47 AM
Obama uses EU to confront Israel with tough interlinked choices: borders or nuclear-armed Iran -http://www.debka.com/article/23124/Obama-uses-EU-to-confront-Israel-with-tough-interlinked-choices-borders-or-nuclear-armed-Iran-
It doesn’t take a political genius to see how US Secretary of State John Kerry’s arrival in Amman Tuesday, July 16, for his sixth bid to bring Israelis and the Palestinians to the table, ties in with the new EU anti-Israel funding guidelines published on the same day. To avoid a head-on clash with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, the US president has loosed the Europeans in full cry against Jerusalem and its policies. European Union foreign affairs executive Catherine Ashton chairs the international negotiating forum with Iran. And so, the EU has given Tehran a broad wink that it is worth its while to come to a fresh round of nuclear diplomacy while Israel is kept on the run in the settlements-cum-borders dispute.
Israel is further weakened by its own internal political difficulties.
The third Netanyahu cabinet is painfully shorthanded of ministers for dealing with foreign diplomacy and national security affairs. In the absence of a foreign minister, shackled with a new cabinet which took office in February, and beset with a reshuffle of his close aides, the prime minister is obliged to carry himself most of the burden for key decisions on the essential business of state.
When he decides not to decide on any issue, that issue is shuffled into the pending tray to await his attention – and of late, this is happening too often.
Netanyahu is taxed currently with keeping tabs on the conflict close to Israel’s borders in Egyptian Sinai, the threatened spillover of the Syrian war – only part of which reaches the public – and the approach of a nuclear Iran, which he admits is dangerously close to consummation. Every few weeks, he is put on the spot for fast decisions by US Secretary of State Kerry’s peace drive.
It is no wonder that Netanyahu drops some of the balls he is juggling.
The last ball to slip out of his hands was the new European Commission’s new guideline for the alliance to distinguish between the state of Israel and territories outside the 1967 Green Line for the purpose of co-funding projects and grants.
This guideline is grounded in the EU’s fixed determination that East Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan were illegally occupied by Israel after the 1967 Arab-Israel war. The “settlements” housing more than a half a million Jews are likewise deemed illegal. Therefore, from Jan. 1, 2014, any Israeli entity seeking European project funding or grants will be obliged to declare it has no connection, direct or indirect, with a “settlement.”
There is nothing new about this determination. The European Union has for years boycotted goods manufactured in settlements and demanded that Israel exporters label their products with the source of manufacture. Ever since 1967, the UK has withheld pensions and allowances from British expatriates living outside the Green Line until they relocate to addresses London deems kosher.
And that is only one of many examples.
However, the new guidelines have exacerbated the rift between Brussels and Jerusalem and signal a further deterioration. If in future every Israeli firm is required before every financial or business transaction with Europe to disassociate from EU-proscribed Jewish communities, then bilateral trade, whose volume has climbed to 40 billion euros, will gradually decline, with as much economic fallout for Europe as for Israel.
Israel’s prime minister responded fast and hard to the new EU guidelines with a bitter broadside for what he sees as outside interference in the definition of Israel’s borders, in a manner which compromises direct Israel negotiations with the Palestinians. Direct negotiations are the only way to define those borders, he stressed, and the EU measure had the effect of tilting them in the Palestinians’ favor.
Netanyahu was particularly incensed by the EU dropping its bombshell on the day John Kerry arrived in Amman to pick up his mission for reviving the peace track, which he interrupted empty-handed earlier this month.
Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon greeted Kerry’s arrival by eulogizing his mission, accusing the Palestinians of burying it by sheer obstructionism. Ya’alon no doubt followed the line set by the prime minister.
Kerry spent five hours talking to Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas Tuesday night, in yet another effort to melt his insistence on Israel meeting his preconditions for a meeting.
By Wednesday morning, the US Secretary had not yet arranged to meet Israeli officials this time round.
Israeli policy-makers understand that Washington is dodging a showdown with Netanyahu by using the Europeans to clobber his policies at a moment of internal weakness in Jerusalem. Now they realize they must brace urgently for the next chapter in the Obama campaign: Ashton will build on the EU steps to get a fresh round of world power-Iranian nuclear negotiations underway by persuading Tehran that Brussels, with Washington’s backing, is in full flight of a diplomatic campaign for cutting Israel down to size.
By pulling the wires behind the European campaign, the Obama administration is after three goals:
1. Persuading Tehran to return to international diplomacy on its nuclear program by diminishing Israel’s leverage.
2. Confronting Israel with diplomatic isolation on an issue of prime importance to its security, i.e., the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, unless the Netanyahu government agrees to concessions to the Palestinians on final borders.
3. Warning Netanyahu that his failure to toe the Obama line on the Syrian conflict and the Egyptian army coup will cost Israel dear. Instead of lining up with what is seen in the region as an ineffectual Washington, Israel struck out on its own to play ball with regional forces on the move, the Arab rulers of the Gulf and the Egyptian army. The US president has used the European Union to make sure Jerusalem understands that he too will pursue his own game – and it will be at the expense of Israel’s interests.
EU Redraws Israel Borders to 1949 Lines – http://the-end-time.blogspot.com/2013/07/eu-redraws-israel-borders-to-1949-lines.html
The title above is from Israel National News this evening. The recent re-attention to Israel by the US in its attempts to re-start the peace talks, Israel’s hints to engage in a military option very soon regarding Iran, and this bold and highly non-biblical, non-God approved move to re-draw Israel’s lines heats the prophetic landscape up to a very prophetic degree.
For the first time, the EU formally forbids trade with bodies located beyond 1949 Armistice lines, including Golan
“The European Union has issued orders forbidding its member states from cooperating, transferring funds, giving scholarships or research grants to bodies in Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem, and even the Golan Heights, Haaretz wrote Tuesday. The new instruction, promulgated by the European Commission, which is the operative arm of the EU, sets parameters for cooperation between the EU and its members states, on the one hand, and Israeli governmental and private elements on the other. The instructions are for the years 2014 – 2020 and will go into force on Friday, July 18. The decision also states that any future agreement signed with Israel must include a section that says the “settlements” are not part of sovereign Israel and therefore not included in the agreement. A senior source in the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that the new EU decision is dramatic, and can be called “a true earthquake.”
I agree, it is huge.
How dare they say what Israel’s sovereign borders are! Israel is its own nation, and sets its own borders. Going even higher, the LORD takes a personal and intimate interest in His nation and His Land.
“Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:1-3)
Israel Condemns EU Move to Limit Funds Beyond 1967 Border
“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would accept “no external dictates” on its borders after a European Union decision to restrict subsidies to organizations operating beyond its 1967 borders.” I would expect that anyone for whom stability and peace in the region is really important to find time to discuss this issue after resolving more urgent problems such as the civil war in Syria and Iran’s race to achieve nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said in a text message.”
“The European Commission, the union’s executive arm, said it will soon publish “guidelines” making good on a December pledge to deny EU funding to Israeli organizations in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights.” All Israeli entities whose place of establishment is within the green line will be considered eligible,” EU spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic told reporters in Brussels today. The green line refers to Israel’s pre-1967 borders. The guidelines will cover central EU funding and won’t affect contracts between individual European governments and Israel, Kocijancic said. She said the result could be funding restrictions in “a very small number of cases.”
“Israeli captured the three areas during the 1967 Middle East War with its Arab neighbors. It has since withdrawn troops and evacuated settlements in Gaza and annexed the Golan in a move that has not been recognized internationally. Israel says the fate of settlements in the West Bank must be resolved in peace negotiations.”
“The EU decision shows “once again how disconnected Europe is, and why it can’t play a real partnership role in negotiations” between Israel and the Palestinians, Minister of Regional Development Silvan Shalom said today on Army Radio. Hanan Ashrawi, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Executive Committee, welcomed what she called a “significant move.” “The EU has moved from the level of statements, declarations and denunciations to effective policy decisions and concrete steps which constitute a qualitative shift that will have positive impact on the chances of peace,” she said. The decision comes before a visit to the region this week by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who is trying to revive peace talks that have been suspended since 2010.”
Isolating Israel…it’s prophesied. Though the fulfillment will occur at Armageddon, the unbroken line of prophetic history hurtling us down the timeline to that moment is speeding ever closer.
“The burden of the word of the Lord concerning Israel: Thus declares the Lord, who stretched out the heavens and founded the earth and formed the spirit of man within him: “Behold, I am about to make Jerusalem a cup of staggering to all the surrounding peoples. The siege of Jerusalem will also be against Judah. “On that day I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples. All who lift it will surely hurt themselves. And all the nations of the earth will gather against it.” (Zechariah 12:1-3)
Netanyahu’s quote about stability and peace… yes…it’s all about peace and security.
“While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.” (1 Thessalonians 5:3)
War drums beating again. We’ve had a little ‘time off’ from the near misses, brinksmanship and vitriolic rhetoric, but now it’s (sic) back. This time with action, not just words. It is widely believed that Israel is behind the strike on Syria’s Russian-anti ship missiles
U.S. Officials: Israel Behind Recent Syria Airstrike
“A series of explosions last week at a critical Syrian port was the result of airstrikes by Israeli warplanes, multiple U.S. officials told CNN on Friday. Regional media widely reported the predawn explosions at Latakia on July 5, but no one had officially claimed responsibility. Three U.S. officials told CNN the target of the airstrikes were Russian-made Yakhont anti-ship missiles that Israel believes posed a threat to its naval forces. The officials declined to be named because of the sensitive nature of the information. So far, the Israeli government has also declined to comment to CNN. The Syrian rebels said on Tuesday that “foreign forces” had destroyed advanced Russian anti-ship missiles in Latakia, hinting that Israel may have been behind the attack.”
But then later the US said for sure that Israel did the deed.
Russia did not take that lightly, or even lying down. “Coincidentally” Russia just ordered 160,000 troops to combat readiness in a “surprise drill” and said to be ready by July 13.
‘Russia stages large-scale military drills’
“Russia has staged large-scale military exercises in the country’s Eastern military district aimed at enhancing the defense capabilities of its armed forces, Defense Ministry says. The drills, which are the largest surprise check of combat readiness of the Russian military in the post-Soviet period, started on Saturday. The surprise training exercise involves over 80,000 troops, some 1,000 tanks and armored vehicles, 130 aircraft and helicopters 70 warships and will continue until July 20. “The main goal of the drills is to check the readiness of units to carry out their missions, and to assess the quality of their training and technical preparedness,” Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement. On Friday, during a meeting with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu Russian, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an unexpected military drill, urging all forces to enter a state of full combat readiness on the night of July 13.”
Remember, there is a prophecy regarding a yet-unfulfilled battle of Psalm 83 involving a surprise attack on Israel by all of Israel’s abutting neighbors (which Israel wins, claiming the lands). There is also prophesied a surprise attack led by Russia along with Turkey and Israel’s further neighbors that is also yet unfulfilled (Ezekiel 38-39). Both of those are widely believed to be end of last day’s prophecies or prophecies to be fulfilled during the Tribulation. No one is quite sure of the order, as in which comes first or maybe they are nearly simultaneous, but many believe that Psalm 83 would be fulfilled first because Israel is said to be dwelling in the center of the Land in Ezekiel 37:12 and had accumulated much goods. Israel is prophesied to in the Psalm 83 battle and it is supposed that she spreads out and occupies her abutting, by then defeated neighbors. None of these neighbors make another murmur, and are not listed in the Gog-Magog coalition, so it seems that they would be set aside or nullified first. Many believe that a defeat in Psalm 83 does the trick.
Isaiah 17:1 and onward prophesies the complete destruction of Damascus, Syria and its environs. This also has never been fulfilled.
“On that day I will make the clans of Judah like a blazing pot in the midst of wood, like a flaming torch among sheaves. And they shall devour to the right and to the left all the surrounding peoples, while Jerusalem shall again be inhabited in its place, in Jerusalem.” (Zechariah 12:6)
Iranian Nukes on the Horizon – Noah Beck -http://frontpagemag.com/2013/noah-beck/iranian-nukes-on-the-horizon/
President Obama’s Middle East policy has been an ever-worsening train wreck because it lacks credibility and strategy, as Egypt, Libya, and particularly Syria, have shown. And the region is about to get much worse, unless Obama exercises resolute leadership on the most important global security issue of this generation: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
In a commerce-critical region where “might makes right” and only the strong survive, Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons could have catastrophic consequences for the Middle East and beyond. The resulting dangers potentially include: (i) nuclear proliferation, as other Mideast countries feel threatened into pursuing their own nuclear programs; (ii) the transfer of nuclear materials from Iran – the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism – to terrorist organizations and/or rogue states; (iii) bolder attacks by Iranian terror proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc.) protected by Iran’s nuclear umbrella; and (iv) an even more belligerent Iran that flexes its nuclear arsenal to: export its radical Islamic ideology, acquire disputed territories and resources from neighboring countries, and/or undertake actions like blocking the Strait of Hormuz to increase the price of oil.
As Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, recently told CBS News’s Face the Nation, the Islamic Republic is now dangerously close to a nuclear capability. Because Iran has stockpiled about 190 pounds of 20% enriched uranium, Iran is just 60 kilograms – potentially just weeks – short of crossing the nuclear “red line” that Netanyahu set in his speech before the UN last September.
Unfortunately, Obama has signaled no urgency over Iranian nukes. Perhaps he hopes for a negotiated settlement to the issue, now that Hassan Rouhani, a so-called “moderate,” was elected to assume Iran’s presidency next month. But hope is not a strategy with the Iranian regime. Rouhani has been linked to the 1994 terrorist bombing of an Argentine Jewish community center that killed 85 people, and has boasted about how he manipulated nuclear talks with the West about a decade ago to expand Iran’s nuclear program. More importantly, Iran’s foreign policy is set by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has banned concessions to the West. Indeed, Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, the head of Iran’s atomic energy agency, made it clear last Friday that Rouhani’s election will have no impact on Iran’s nuclear enrichment activities.
Obama must also recognize that the sanctions against Iran have demonstrably failed. The Islamic Republic has skillfully outmaneuvered them, as shown in a leaked U.N. report detailing 11 instances of Iran violating sanctions, including attempts to acquire materials for its atomic program. Reuters published an expose outlining how Iran exploits sanctions loopholes to import ore from Germany and France that could be used for making armor and missiles. More importantly, the Iranian nuclear weapons program has never once stopped because of sanctions. The only time that Iran ever suspended its nuclear program was after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when Iran briefly feared that a U.S. attack was imminent.
Obama’s Iran policy has thus far failed to produce any credible deterrent. It’s time for Obama to build on the lead of Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird, who warned last month that Iran only has only a few months to demonstrate to the West that it is serious about a negotiated solution to the standoff.
Israel doesn’t have the luxury of treating its red lines the way Obama has treated the one he set for Syria’s use of chemical weapons; that means that the volatile Middle East of today could become far more engulfed in war and instability. Netanyahu’s latest message may be the canary in the coalmine giving its final warning, so Obama should provide bold leadership on this critical issue before it’s too late. New Jersey-sized Israel survives only by the strength of the military force that it projects. Critical to that deterrent is making good on its threats, as Israel did with its destruction of the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear programs, in 1981 and 2007, respectively, and its ongoing surgical airstrikes to prevent Syria from transferring game-changing weapons to Hezbollah.
Given such exploits, isolationists might wonder why the U.S. should bother; let Israel bear all of the costs and risks of eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat for us, goes the thinking. But the nuclear program in Iran is far more dispersed, hardened, and distant than what Israel neutralized in Iraq and Syria. Iranian nukes are truly vulnerable only to U.S. military capabilities. Expecting Israel to do the job is like a heavyweight-boxing champion asking his featherweight friend to defend him against the approaching middleweight champion. Such cowardly tactics needlessly endanger the featherweight ally, but – more importantly – there is a good chance that the middleweight won’t be fully neutralized and will feel far more emboldened to attack the heavyweight after he concludes (alongside the rest of the world) that the heavyweight is just a paper tiger.
Iran can already attack U.S. interests across the Middle East and Europe. And as early as 2015, Iran could develop and test ballistic missiles that could strike the continental U.S., according to a Pentagon report released last week (“2013 Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat Assessment”). Obama can wait for the U.S. to be drawn into war with a nuclear-armed Iran, or he can proactively address the threat before Iran acquires nukes. But he cannot hide from the threat or hope it away. Obama must lead – before Iran’s nuclear recalcitrance forces Israel’s hand, with potentially apocalyptic consequences.
YOU KNOW the USA and EU Work AGAINST Israel, Right?
John R. Houk
© July 17, 2013
Excerpted from Prophecy Update
Sent: July 17, 2013 11:47 AM
John R. Houk
© June 18, 2012
I know that most sane people believes that Terry Jones is a Muslim-hating crank covered in the auspices of a Christian Church and an academic doctorate. The thing is though his politically incorrect agenda to burn Qurans and stand on the roof tops proclaiming that Islam is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution is absolutely a good thing.
The Quran commands Muslims to convert, humiliate or kill Jews and Christians. Why? Jews and Christians believe the Bible (Pentateuch-Torah for Jews and both Old Testament and New Testament for Christians) is the Word of God while the Quran is a collection warped lies plagiarized from the Bible. The Quran actually claims the Holy writings of the Bible that pre-date Mohammed and the Quran is a pile of paper deception.
As an American Christian the anti-Liberty, Jew-Hatred and Christian-hatred embedded in the Quran, the Hadith and the Sira are quite enough to peacefully expose the nature of Islam and Sharia Law as it affects the Constitution, Judaism and Christianity. I placed the words ‘peacefully expose’ to remind non-Muslims living under the authority of the U.S. Constitution cannot and must not use violence against another religion even a theopolitical religion such as Islam. In America Religious Freedom and Free Speech are guaranteed by the very Constitution that purist Muslims desire to destroy. HOWEVER, Religious Freedom and Free Speech does not give a pass to anyone – religious or political ideology or both – to commit acts of violence against people living under the rule of law defined by the U.S. Constitution. Acts of violence aimed to illegally bring down Constitutional government is treason and should be treated as such.
Terry Jones is not committing ANY acts of violence against people when he publicly announces he is going to burn 2,998 Qurans representing the deaths of Americans by Muslims killing in the name of Allah just as the Quran commands to do against those that refuse Islamic Supremacism. Note the violence perpetrated on 9/11 was done by Radical Muslims against working Americans who for the most part had no idea their political system under the U.S. Constitution insulted Islam so much that Islamic honor required retribution.
Leftists are blind multiculturalists so I can see their extreme dislike of Terry Jones. Most upstanding Conservatives especially Republicans condemn Terry Jones because they have brainwashed that criticism of Islam is hate-speech thanks to the hard work of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the multiculturalist mindset of European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN) complicity with the OIC agenda to squash all criticism of Islam.
In writing all this below is the latest public announcement from Terry Jones announcing another World Burn the Quran day scheduled for September 11, 2013. The synopsis below the video directs you to go to the website Stand Up America for more details.
Posted by StandUpAmericaNow Youtube Channel
Posted Apr 12, 2013
Stand Up America Media Release
WORLDWIDE BURNING OF 2,998 KORANS ON SEPTEMBER 11th, 2013
By Dr Terry Jones
Email Sent: June 17, 2013 5:22 AM
Sent from: Stand Up America Now
We have secured a location in the Tampa Bay area for our September 11th event. We will be releasing the location in the near future.
The radical hand of Islam shows itself with violence against anyone who dares to stand up and speak the truth. We at Stand Up America Now will not back down. We will not be silent.
Abraham Lincoln said, “To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.”
On September 11th, 2013, to remember those who were murdered by radical Islam, and to send Islam a very clear warning, that they will not get their foothold in the American Constitution as they have done in Europe, we will be holding an International Burning of 2,998 Korans, representing one for each individual who was murdered in the September 11th, 2001 attacks.
President Obama is a aggressively working to convince the American public that criticism of Islam is a violation of a Muslim’s civil rights. The American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee met last week with top Department of Justice official, Bill Killian. Both groups agree: federal civil rights laws are violated by those who post “inflammatory documents” aimed at Muslims on social media.
Peaceful speech and expression is fully within our civil rights! Criticism of Islam cannot be avoided, especially in light of recent events. While this scrutiny is to be considered “inflammatory,” the murderously inflammatory words of the Koran and the teachings of Islam’s leaders are protected. We are on an extremely dangerous path as a nation!
The Woolwich, UK, killing of British soldier Lee Rigby
The stabbing of a soldier in France, again by a Muslim
ALL committed by men acting on the teachings of Islam and the Koran!
Stand Up America Now, invites you to send Korans to:
5805 NW 37 Street, Gainesville, Florida 32653
SEE OUR FACEBOOK EVENT PAGE: Worldwide Burning of 2998 Korans on September 11th, 2013
Dr Terry Jones
Stand Up America Now
This poster was featured in a recent Inspire Magazine published by al Qaeda in Yemen. (Source: MEMRI.org)
On YouTube: StandUpAmericaNow
On Facebook: Stand Up America with Dr Terry Jones
Burning the Quran will Factor in the News Again
John R. Houk
© June 18, 2012
WORLDWIDE BURNING OF 2,998 KORANS ON SEPTEMBER 11th, 2013
Please financially support us as we continue our stand against radical Islam and the moral decline of America: DONATE TODAY
You can also PARTNER with Stand Up America Now by making a monthly donation.
Donations may be mailed to:
5200 NW 43rd St
Ste. 102 #188
Gainesville, FL 32606-4486
MEDIA CONTACT: (352) 371-2487 or (352) 871-2680 (Stephanie Sapp)
Unbelievably the same IRS that targeted Conservative organizations looking for 501c(3) and 501c(4) tax status has reinstated the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a tax exempt organization. The same CAIR that was stripped of the status for failing to file adequate returns AND still has not done has been reinstated to tax exempt status. Oh yes, the IRS has restored tax exempt status to the same CAIR that still is listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial in which convictions were handed out to HLF members for gathering tax exempt donations that were then passed on the Islamic terrorist organization Hamas. AND in case you haven’t heard Hamas is a Jew-hating terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel and often kills Jewish civilians oft times in a horrendous bloody fashion.
DHS, IRS, CAIR, tea parties
Sent by ACT for America
Sent: 6/10/2013 3:19 PM
Today we bring you two different articles that have a common theme.
The first is a WorldNetDaily story that begins this way:
You can thank the Electronic Privacy Information Center for forcing the Department of Homeland Security to release its list of “keywords” that are used by its agents to monitor you on Twitter, Facebook and other social networking sites.
The story then lists the various “key words,” and here’s what’s revealing. You’ll find “militia” but not “jihad.” In fact, you won’t find any “key word” that links specifically to radical Islam.
The second article is also a WorldNetDaily story, which exposes how the IRS restored tax-exempt status to CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations).
In 2011, the IRS stripped CAIR of this non-profit status for failing to file non-profit tax returns for years. Yet the IRS restored CAIR’s status despite the fact that CAIR still has not filed all the information required for previous years!
Meanwhile, of course, we’ve all read about the IRS targeting of tea party, pro-national security and pro-Israel organizations.
Do these two stories suggest a pattern to you?
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
Moral relativism and jihad
John R. Houk
© April 16, 2013
Caroline Glick wrote a scathing yet appropriate exposé on the ignorance of Jewish-American organizations when it comes to Israel and Jew-hating Muslims. It is not surprising that that Left Wing self-loathing Jews moronically support anti-Israel agendas but I find it particularly loathing that Jewish organizations that are considered respectable Right leaning on issues and decidedly pro-Israel remained silent in the face of anti-Israel support given to Radical Islamic governments by the Obama Administration. Glick goes further in criticizing Orthodox Jews for supporting a musician that is virulently involved in anti-Israel Boycott Divest and Sanction (BDS) activities that support Palestinian Statehood while Synagogues that invite Counterjihad speakers like Pamela Geller cave in to American Radical Islamic organizations to cancel exposés of Muslim hatred by actually accusing Geller-like speakers of racist bigotry.
Unsurprisingly Youtube blocked Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) video exposing Hate-Speech broadcast from Palestinian Authority (PA) operated television. The irony is Youtube was not Censoring the PA from Hate-Speech but rather was Censoring PMW from exposing the PA as a Jew-Hating/Israel-Hating organization backed by major global governments including the USA to become an independent sovereign nation to be named Palestine. This also includes stealing half the Israeli capital city of Jerusalem to make it the capital of the only nation in the world that has one to exist; i.e. to kill Jews and overthrow a democratic nation and member of the United Nations.
YouTube blocks PMW video that exposes PA TV hate speech to kids
YouTube accuses PMW of “spreading hatred” and threatens to close down PMW’s YouTube account
By Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Apr. 7, 2013
Last week, Palestinian Media Watch released a video-bulletin showing a Palestinian Authority children’s TV broadcast of a hate-poem. A young Palestinian girl recited a poem referring to Jews as “Allah’s enemies, the sons of pigs” who “murdered children,” “cut off their limbs,” “raped the women in the city squares” and “defiled Allah’s book.” The host responded with enthusiastic applause and “Bravo!”
The following day, YouTube blocked access to PMW’s video, defining it as a “violation of YouTube’s policy prohibiting hate speech.”
In the past, YouTube has closed PMW’s account or frozen PMW’s account for exposing PA religious leaders promoting genocide of Jews. This is the first time YouTube has defined a broadcast on PA children’s TV as hate speech, and blocked PMW from exposing it.
PMW does not promote hate speech, but exposes it. PMW believes that the only way to stop the Palestinian Authority’s ongoing Islam-based hate speech and terror glorification is to expose it. By preventing PMW from exposing PA hatred, YouTube is actively impeding our ability to fight the PA’s hate promotion.
YouTube has even threatened PMW with termination of its YouTube account should PMW continue exposing this hate speech:
“Additional violations may result in the temporary disabling of your ability to post content to YouTube and/or the permanent termination of your account.”
PMW has requested that YouTube return the video. PMW has no direct line of contact with YouTube administrators, other than their standard appeal option on their website. Therefore, we ask anyone who has contacts at YouTube to please help encourage YouTube to make our video accessible again.
For now, we have uploaded the children’s TV video to a different server and it can now be viewed here.
The following was the original bulletin last week:
Religious hate speech for children on PA TV
Child recites poem:
Jews – “Allah’s enemies, the sons of pigs”
“murdered children,” “cut off their limbs,”
“raped the women in the city squares”
and “defiled Allah’s book”
by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Recently, Palestinian children were taught Islam-based hatred of Jews on the weekly PA TV children’s show The Best Home. A young girl recited a poem filled with both Islamic hate messages and other libels demonizing Jews. The poem taught Palestinian children that Jews, “Allah’s enemies, the sons of pigs,” defiled the Quran and Jerusalem, both crimes against Islam, and “murdered children,” “cut off their limbs,” and “raped the women in the city squares.” Palestinian Media Watch has documented that this weekly PA TV children’s program teaches hatred and denial of Israel’s existence.
Youtube VIDEO (Unless removed or suspended again): Jews are “Allah’s enemies, the sons of pigs” – in poem recited
The suggested response to Jews and Zionists offered in this hate poem is military and Islamic:
“Where is the nation of Islam?
Where are the nation of Islam and the Jihad fighters?”
At the end of the recital of the hate poem, the young program host applauded enthusiastically and said:
“Bravo, applause, applause, applause to Hadeel.”
The poem also included a tribute to Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah organization and Arafat:
“From between the whistles of the bullets I sing:
‘Long live the nation of Fatah and Yasser Arafat.’”
This Islam-based hatred that in the past was associated exclusively with Hamas is now appearing in mainstream PA children’s education as well.
The following is the text of the hate poem recited by a young girl on PA TV’s children’s program:
Girl: “Allah created me and formed me
He made me prouder and made me a Palestinian
He made defiance flow like blood in my veins
And I made the revolution burst forth like clay stones
I raised the flags of certain victory:
Allah’s book [the Quran] and the tradition of the most esteemed among prophets [Muhammad].
I called in the voice of hidden justice
I lit a fire like volcanoes under their feet
I refused to be submissive and degraded
I rejected [everything] but dying with the honor that will give me life
From a nation that has forgotten the Muslims’ heroism
- Omar ibn al-Khattab and Saladin – [Muslim fighters who conquered Jerusalem]
from between the whistles of the bullets I sing:
‘Long live the nation of Fatah and Yasser Arafat’
Allah’s enemies, the sons of pigs (i.e., Jews, in Islamic tradition)
Destroyed and uprooted the olive and fig trees
They murdered children with guns, like snakes
They cut off their limbs with stones and knives
They raped the women in the city squares
They defiled Allah’s book [the Quran] in front of millions
Where is the nation of Islam?
Where are the nation of Islam and the Jihad fighters?
Where is the fear of Allah in Jerusalem, which has been defiled by the Zionists?”
PA TV host: “Bravo, applause, applause, applause to Hadeel.”
[PA TV (Fatah), March 22, 2013]
PMW has documented the PA’s promotion of Antisemitic messages.
PMW has documented the PA’s promotion of libels and lies about Jews and Israelis.
© 1997-2013 Palestinian Media Watch
Founded in 1996, Palestinian Media Watch is an Israeli research institute that studies Palestinian society from a broad range of perspectives by monitoring and analyzing the Palestinian Authority through its media and schoolbooks. PMW’s major focus is on the messages that the Palestinian leaders, from the Palestinian Authority, Fatah and Hamas, send to the population through the broad range of institutions and infrastructures they control.
PMW’s many reports and studies on Palestinian … READ THE REST
John R. Houk
© March 11, 2013
This video was posted in February 2012 to briefly let people know that Antisemitism is alive and well on U.S. university campuses. Unfortunately I am a little late with this post which is a condemnation of a pro-Palestinian/Anti-Israel propaganda seminar accusing Israel of human rights violations and completely letting Islamic terrorists off the hook for their murder and mayhem of Jews in Israel. That propaganda seminar is called Israel Apartheid Week.
Below is an email from David Horowitz that tells what really happens in Israel and on American College Campuses pertaining to Jews. Tragically Jews are persecuted by Islamic terrorists in Israel with blood and mayhem and Jews and supporters of Israel are vilified by Islamic racists often connected to either Palestinian (Islamic) terrorists or from organizations affiliated with the Jew-Hating Muslim Brotherhood. This week of Antisemitic lies is allow to occur on college campuses that have bought into the propaganda disseminated by Islamic terrorist connected organizations operating with near impunity in the USA.
I am cross posting the Horowitz email but first You should take the time to view this video exposing the lies of Jew-Haters that are the supporters of Israel Apartheid Week:
Must Read Article
[Islamic Apartheid Week]
Sent by David Horowitz
Sent: March 8, 2013 9:03 AM
Sent from David Horowitz Freedom Center
Earlier this week, I sent you an email about the advertisement the Freedom Center will be running in campus newspapers at Colleges and Universities around the country. Today, I wanted to share with you an article, written by the Center’s Daniel Greenfield, which illustrates why getting this ad distributed as far and wide as possible is so critical.
I hope you’ll take a moment to read this article, and if you haven’t already, make a generous, tax-deductible donation to support our efforts.
A Double Standard on Hate
By Daniel Greenfield
Every year college campuses across the country hold a festival of hatred aimed at Jews and the Jewish State. Israeli Apartheid Week has become notorious for the targeted harassment of Jewish students, support for Hamas and even physical violence.
This year the David Horowitz Freedom Center has responded to Israeli Apartheid Week with Islamic Apartheid Week. Unlike Israeli Apartheid Week, which is based on a lie, Islamic Apartheid Week addresses the sexism, homophobia and religious bigotry threatening minorities in the Muslim world. To promote Islamic Apartheid Week, the Freedom Center attempted to place an ad in forty college papers.
The ad called “Faces of Islamic Apartheid” drew attention to the victims of Islamic sexism, homophobia and theocracy by briefly telling the stories of gay men hanged in Iran, women and girls murdered by their governments and their families for the crime of falling in love and the Christian Minister for Minorities Affairs in Pakistan’s cabinet who was murdered for trying to reform his country’s theocratic blasphemy laws.
These four women, three men and one little girl were the victims of Islamic Apartheid. Five of them have been murdered. Their memory lives on only when they are remembered. One has been on death row for six years. Telling her story may help save her life. The remaining two live under threat of death.
Instead of listening to their stories, the campus culture of political correctness drowned out their voices and apologized for even allowing their stories to be told.
Nine college papers turned the ad down, five of them in the University of California system which has been criticized for tolerating anti-Semitism. When the California State Assembly passed a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on campus and warned that no public resources should be used for anti-Semitic hate, the University of California objected on free speech grounds. However free speech for Israeli Apartheid Week did not translate into free speech for Islamic Apartheid Week.
Seven college papers took the advertisement. Of those papers, Tufts University’s Tufts Daily and Austin’s Daily Texan both ran apologies from their editors for even printing the ad.
Tufts Daily editor Martha Shanahan called the decision to run the ad an “editorial oversight.” Daily Texan editor Susannah Jacob denounced the attempt to tell the stories of victimized women and children as “hateful” and “an unspoken incitement to violence.”
Martha Shanahan spent two pages apologizing for the existence of the “Islamophobic and violently offensive” advertisement, the existence of Tufts Daily, its staff and her own existence. At no point during her long series of apologies, did Martha acknowledge that her paper had run four editorials in a single week from Students for Justice in Palestine attacking Israel and promoting hatred for the Jewish State. And in an unequal response to this, it also ran a brief letter from Tufts Friends of Israel distancing itself from the ad and politely suggesting that apartheid shouldn’t be used to refer to Israel.
Anthony Monaco, the President of Tufts University, took to Twitter to denounce the advertisement for vilifying Islam, but made no such denunciation of the Tufts Daily’s op-ed, “The Case for Israeli Apartheid” which (not coincidentally) appeared on the same day as the ad. At Tufts, no one apologizes for accusing democratic Israel of apartheid. There are only apologies when theocratic Iran and Pakistan are accused of practicing Islamic Apartheid.
When anti-Israel voices are outweighed 4-to-1 and the editor apologizes for publishing another perspective that would have made it 4-to-2 then the freedom of debate at Tufts University is in a very sad state. When that same editor prints editorials describing Israel as an apartheid state, but promises to put in place an entire system of oversight to make certain that no advertisement challenging Islamic Apartheid is ever printed again, then a system of censorship has been put into place silencing the voices of victims and encouraging their persecutors.
The Daily Texan’s Susannah Jacob claimed that the crosshairs over the faces of the victims were an incitement to violence when they were actually a way of bringing urgency to the violence that had been committed against them. And making it clear that she never even saw the advertisement that she was denouncing, Susannah described the ad as depicting six women, when it included two gay men, one Christian man and one little girl.
Susannah further distorted the truth about Islamic Apartheid when she described the pervasive sexism, homophobia and theocracy that these people fell victim to as “discrete incidents of violence by Muslims” being used “to implicate all Muslims” while ignoring the fact that five of the victims in the ad had been targeted by their governments or with government backing.
Can the Daily Texan’s editor honestly claim that Iran’s persecution of women and gay men or Pakistan’s persecution of Christians are “discrete incidents of violence”, rather than state policy? Could she find a single human rights organization that would agree with such a dishonest whitewashing of the terror under which millions live?
The responses to the advertisement have established once again that some forms of apartheid are privileged on campus and that some forms of persecution cannot be talked about. Demonizing the Israeli victims of Islamic terror is within the realm of campus free speech, but speaking about the vulnerable minorities in the Muslim world is not.
If the advertisement was wrong, then there would have been no need to censor it. False claims can easily be disproven. Five minutes with Google would have told every reader and editor whether there was any truth to the Faces of Islamic Apartheid.
It is never necessary to censor lies. It is only necessary to censor truth.
That is why the majority of campus papers – ten so far, including Harvard whose editors said they would not print it under any circumstances — refused to run this paid advertisement. It is why those few who did have begun making ritual apologies while lying about its contents. It is why the attacks on the advertisement have taken refuge in vague platitudes about offensiveness, without a single attempt at a factual rebuttal. It is why every response to the advertisement has consisted of claiming that speaking about Islamic bigotry is the real bigotry.
There were eight faces and eight names in the censored advertisement that the President of Tufts, the editors of Tufts Daily, the Daily Texan and the editors of ten college papers that turned down the ad, did not want their students to see or know about because it might disturb the manufactured campus consensus that they have constructed with great effort around Israel and Islamic terrorism.
These are the names. Amina Said. Sarah Said. Afshan Azad. Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. Shahbas Bhatti. Rimsha Masih. Mahmoud Asgari. Ayaz Marhoni.
They were repressed as individuals. Now their story is being repressed on the American campus.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center
Begin forwarded message:
From: David Horowitz
Date: March 5, 2013 11:05 AM EST
Subject: Expose the lies on our campuses
Dear Freedom Center Supporter,
Anti Semitism on America’s campuses—nonstop bashing of Israel and glorification of Hamas and other jihad groups, and even physical intimidation of Jewish students—is worse than ever. Administrators and faculty accepts all this as part of the university’s standard operating procedure. But the Freedom Center calls it for what it is—an intellectual reign of terror.
And we’re fighting back!
Think of what is allowed to take place these days as part of our universities’ business as usual:
These unrelenting attacks against Israel and Jewish students are shameful and disgusting. Will you help the Freedom fight back today with a tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more?
While the truth about the Middle East is systematically turned upside-down and inside-out, no one is stepping forward to defend Israel and remind her enemies that:
There’s only one organization willing to go onto our campuses to tell our students the truth about this brutal discrimination that occurs under Islamic Sharia Law—and that’s the Freedom Center.
This year the Freedom Center is sponsoring “Islamic Apartheid Weeks” on over 50 campuses across the country. These events will provide a truth-telling, in your face response to the Big Lies that are at the foundation of the leftist “Israel Apartheid Weeks.” They will explain and explore the many forms of Islamic apartheid—racism, ethnic cleansing, gender discrimination, political oppression and slavery—that have been part of the Middle East for over a millennium and are now spreading into Africa and other regions of the world.
One of the main components of the Freedom Center’s campaign is to insert full-page ads like this one in campus newspapers across the country. Under the headline “Faces of Islamic Apartheid,” the advertisement will features victims of Sharia law abroad and in the U.S. such as Amina and Sarah Said, murdered in Texas by their father for dating non-Muslims, and Shahbas Bhatti, the sole Christian minister in Pakistan’s cabinet who was murdered by members of the Taliban for advocating reform of Pakistan’s strict blasphemy laws.
While our college students hear the Big Lie about Israel every day, they never hear the truth about the body count, even in the U.S., that results from the teachings of radical Islam. And we need them to! So will you support our efforts with an immediate tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more?
We are currently submitting this ad to 50 campus papers around the country to coincide with March’s “Israel Apartheid Week” events. We have already received confirmations that the ad will run in the papers at the following Colleges and Universities,
We are targeting at least another 40 campuses this week. But the cost of running ads in just these newspapers is about $75,000! So please follow this link right now to make a tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more to support our efforts.
These ads do what nothing else can do—highlight the true sources of “apartheid” in the Middle East put the campus Islamists attacking Israel on the defensive. The Freedom Center is on the front lines in the war on campus between the Big Lie and the truth in the Middle East. Your support is critical to making this effort a success.
Thank you for everything you do to help me and the Freedom Center.
President & Founder
P.S. We need your help to place this ad in campus newspapers at Colleges and Universities across the country. Will you make a tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more to the Freedom Center right away? We must raise $75,000 by midnight tomorrow, so I’m counting on you. Thanks—David
Israel Apartheid Week is Hate Jews and Lie about Israel Week
John R. Houk
© March 11, 2013
Must Read Article
The David Horowitz Freedom Center
P.O. Box 55089
Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964
About David Horowitz Freedom Center
OUR MISSION: The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad…. READ THE REST
Hmm … President Barack Hussein Obama nominates Senator Chuck as Secretary Defense. This is the same Chuck Hagel that desires to support Jew-Hating Islamic terrorists to endear America to Arabs even though such a necessary is throwing Israel under the bus. Hagel will actually say the USA is committed to Israel on one side of his mouth and on the other side of his mouth wants to extend diplomatic talks with surround Islamic terrorists that have only one goal; viz., the destruction of Israel and the genocide of Jews.
The ACLJ has started a petition that is probably as much of a fund raiser as it is a voice to such a ridiculous choice as a Hagel nominee; nonetheless a donation is not required at it adds a voice of dissention that is made public by American voters.
By Jay Sekulow
Sent: Jan 7, 2013 at 1:24 PM
President Obama has nominated an anti-Israel former Senator to be Secretary of Defense. Senator Chuck Hagel has blamed American support for Israel on the “Jewish lobby,” refused to sign a letter supporting Israel, and opposed labeling Hezbollah a “terrorist organization.”
But that’s not all. Senator Hagel supported direct dialogue with Hamas – a terrorist group that launches near-daily attacks on Israeli civilians – and even refused to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps as terrorists.
A former Senator with this record of appeasement cannot be second in command of our Armed Forces.
Make your voice heard. Tell the United States Senate to vote against President Obama’s nomination of Senator Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense.
Above Photo not a part of original email
ACLJ Chief Counsel
P.S. Please forward this critical petition to anyone you know who supports Israel and share it on Facebook.
Does a Hagel Nomination Mean a Giant Leap Forward for Iran’s Nuclear Program?
By Jay Sekulow
Jan. 7, 2013 10:55 AM
Since 1948, the hostile governments of the Middle East have done everything in their military power to completely destroy the state of Israel. Immediately after Israel’s declaration of independence, Arab armies united to invade the new nation. In 1967, Israel found itself surrounded by hundreds of thousands of troops and thousands of tanks. In 1973, Egypt and Syria breached the peace and sanctity of Yom Kippur and launched a surprise attack that brought Israel to the brink of extinction.
Each time, Israel was saved by the providence of God and the indescribable courage of its armed forces. Each time, the American people rallied in support of our most faithful ally.
But not even courage can prevail against a nuclear detonation. For the first time since its declaration of independence, Israel is on the verge of facing a nuclear-armed enemy – a nation that has vowed to destroy the Jewish state.
In the face of this threat, President Obama has nominated a former Senator, Chuck Hagel, who has a record of appeasing Iran that is perhaps unmatched by any Senator, current or past. Over at the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol has done invaluable work compiling the sad details of Senator Hagel’s record. Consider the following:
-He has voted against labeling Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, even though the Revolutionary Guard has been fighting a low-intensity war against America, Israel, and other allies for years;
-He voted against labeling Hezbollah – Iran’s army in Lebanon – a terrorist organization in spite of its long record of attacks on Israeli civilians and perhaps even American Marines;
-He voted against the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act at a time when both countries had recently engaged in direct attacks against Americans;
-He opposed the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act; and
-He said – while still a senator – that “[A] military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable, feasible, responsible option.” (Emphasis NCCR)
While no one wants war with Iran, a military strike is preferable to a nuclear Holocaust. Yet Chuck Hagel has taken such an option off the table.
Perhaps most disturbing of all, this nomination – in the face of Democratic and Republican opposition – signals that President Obama values Israel’s security less than any other modern American president. Fortunately, however, he will soon discover that he faces a united American people – from across party lines – that understand a simple moral imperative: Terrorist nations should not possess nuclear weapons. Americans deserve a Secretary of Defense who shares that core moral understanding.
The fact is that Senator Chuck Hagel is not the right person for the job.
Send a powerful message to the Senate: we must protect Israel and that means rejecting Senator Hagel’s nomination. Add your name here.
American Center for Law and Justice | Washington D.C. | Copyright © 2012, ACLJ
The ACLJ is an organization dedicated to the defense of constitutional liberties secured by law.