Exploring Muslim Jew-Hatred


John R. Houk

© June 26, 2015

I find the fact that the Israeli government pulled their video “Open your eyes. Terror rules Gaza” exposing the reality that Hamas is an Islamic terrorist organization, under Western Pressure, QUITE ANNOYING. But it should come as no surprise. Jew-hatred has been around since Biblical times. The descendants traced from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob have face many occasions in which Jew-hatred with the object of destruction came sometimes justly but most often UNJUSTLY.

The Bible records God Almighty allowed punishment against the Hebrew tribes (ultimately called Jews after the last surviving Davidic Kingdom of Judah) for slipping away from their Covenant. The Jews experienced unjust destructive violence first for desiring an independent Jewish nation (Maccabees vs. Syrian remnants of Alexandrian Empire), independence from Roman suzerainty (experiencing mass dispersion after Bar Kochba [or Kokhba or Kokba]) revolt, obsessive Christian persecution from Europeans [See Also HERE] (Christ-killer blood libel and world domination blood libel) and as well as Muslim persecution encoded in the Quran (among other Islamic writings through to this present day).

Since the last Diaspora forced by the Romans the Jews living in their God ordained land was a minority UNTIL – the 20th century. Toward the end of WWI the British through the Balfour Declaration (1917) promised a return of the Jews to their Biblical Homeland. As a European power that was a member of the winning team in WWI the newly formed League of Nations awarded Administration of the Holy Land as the British Mandate of Palestine in 1922. There were 28 Articles in the Palestine Mandate and here is the introduction or preamble (uncertain if there is an actual name for that section):

The Council of the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;

confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows: READ THE REST (The Palestine Mandate; The Avalon Project – Yale Law School; Ratified July 24, 1922 – Avalon Copyright: © 2008 Lillian Goldman Law Library)

Largely due Jewish scientist (Pro-Zionist Chaim Weizmann) aid to the British war effort (Pronounced by PM Lloyd George but denied by Weizmann) clearly the land to be labeled Palestine was created as a future sovereign national Homeland for the Jewish people. (See more precise data at JewishHistory.org)

Just an aside here. Everyone should realize the name “Palestine” was derived from the Roman Emperor Hadrian attempt to wipe all things Jewish away after Bar Kochba’s short lived Israel liberation movement. Hadrian renamed the Jewish Homeland Palestina. The anglicized version is Palestine. Hadrian purposely used longtime enemies of Israel (i.e. the Philistines) that had zero racial connection to the Jews to wipe all things Jewish off the Roman map.

The British original intention for the name “Palestine” during the mandate to reference Jews not Arabs. The Arabs only started to adopt the name (HERE and HERE) Palestinian after 1967 when Israel defeated several invading Arab armies recapturing Judaea/Samaria and Gaza. Those areas had been occupied by invading Arab armies in 1948 trying to destroy the nascent declared Independent State of Israel who then had the purpose to drive Jews into the sea.

Now it looks like the United Nations are flowing with the propaganda originating from the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. The UNHRC Report blames both Israel and Hamas; however Israel points out there are many holes in accusations against the IDF for war crimes.

Here is a press release attributed to Israel’s office President emailed to me via Ari Bussel on June 22 which indicates Israel read the report prior to the public release:

Israeli President Reuven Rivlin’s response to the UN report

Forwarded from Ari Bussel

Forward sent: 6/22/2015 12:18 PM

Communicated by the President’s Spokesperson

22 June 2015 / 5 Tammuz 5775

Government Press Office (GPO) English Homepage

“Just one year has passed since the Israel Defense Forces were required to stand, as a protective edge, for the people of Israel. We lost many of our loved ones, and we still await the return of two of our late sons, and we still hope for the recovery of the wounded. Also last summer, the IDF proved its strength, ability, and above all, its uniqueness, and the ethical and moral place which it holds.

I am proud, as all of Israel should be proud, of the moral strength, and the military abilities of the Israel Defense Forces. I do not see how anybody could judge us and tarnish our name. The moral dilemmas which we face require split-second decisions, when we have a duty and a right to defend the citizens of Israel – women, children, babies – under attack, and when our enemy tramples international law and uses its people as human shields.

As strong as we are, and as sophisticated as our capabilities are, it is incumbent upon us to ask: When do we use force, how do we use it and for what purpose. I have no doubt that the soldiers and officers of the IDF know to ask this question in a timely manner, and to make difficult decisions in real time, without the need for investigations by external bodies. Only one who understands what force is, understands it limits.”

For further details: Jason Pearlman, Foreign Media Advisor, jason@president.gov.il

Here is the full PDF of the UNHRC Report (my PDF copy has 183 pages).

Here is a letter from a high level international military group that essentially refutes the UNHRC Report accusations against Israel (published on June 12).

Here is the Israeli government investigative PDF report on operations of the IDF (Operation Protective Edge) and Hamas prosecution of the Gaza conflict: The 2014 Gaza Conflict – 7 July – 26 August 2014: Factual and Legal Aspect released in May 2015 (277 pages).

And here is some selected excerpts from Legal Insurrection about the truth who actually committed war crimes in the Gaza Conflict:

False statistics about civilian casualties were put out by Hamas ministries and then adopted without question by the UN, “human rights” groups, and the media to create the narrative that “most” or “almost all” or the “vast majority” of deaths were civilian.

Critics of Israel have yet to explain how Israel was supposed to stop Hamas from firing rockets, tunneling under the border, or landing commandos by sea without firing into the civilian areas from which Hamas was operating.

During the 2014 Gaza conflict, we covered the deliberate Hamas tactic of firing from civilian areas (including those next to hospitals and apartments,) as well as how Hamas used the main Gaza hospital as a military headquarters. Almost all of this was covered up by the media:

· Hamas: We intimidated reporters into not covering rocket firing

· Foreign Press Assoc protests “blatant, incessant, forceful and unorthodox” Hamas intimidation

· Watch Hamas set up and fire rocket next to residential buildings

· Hamas hides in, under and around Gaza’s main hospital, and the media covers it up

·Media cover- up of Hamas crimes starting to unravel

· More media cover-up for Hamas exposed

We were well aware of the allegations made by some governments, the United Nations, human rights groups and the media, that Israel acted outside the laws of armed conflict in Gaza. Some have suggested that the IDF lacked restraint or even deliberately targeted innocent civilians.

Our findings lead us to the opposite conclusion. We examined the circumstances that led to the tragic conflict last summer and are in no doubt that this was not a war that Israel wanted. In reality Israel sought to avoid the conflict and exercised great restraint over a period of months before the war when its citizens were targeted by sporadic rocket attacks from Gaza. …

Hamas launched attacks against Israel from the heart of its own civilian communities in Gaza and positioned its munitions and military forces there also, including in schools, hospitals and mosques. As well as carefully documented IDF evidence of this, we have viewed international media footage confirming several cases and are aware of senior Hamas officials’ own claims to have used human shields. …

Measures taken to warn civilians included phone calls, SMS messages, leaflet drops, radio broadcasts, communication via Gaza-based UN staff and the detonation of harmless warning explosive charges, known as “knock on the roof”. Where possible the IDF sought also to give guidance on safe areas and safe routes…. [Bold text this Blog Editor]

READ ENTIRETY (Getting the Gaza “war crimes” truth out, before the UN lies; Posted by William A. Jacobson; Legal Insurrection; 6/14/15 9:00pm)

The sad fact is Hamas and Palestinian Authority Arabs that call themselves Palestinians have been engrained with Jew-Hatred ever since the days of their false prophet known as Mohammed (or Muhammad or Mohamet or whatever). As I wrote earlier the Jew-Hatred is in the Islamic considered holy writings are rampant. Indeed, Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf has been a perennial best seller in Muslim markets from WWII until this present day.

This brings to the inspiration of this expose on Muslim Jew-Hatred (sugar coated by the word ‘Antisemitism’). I read a Middle East Quarterly post on the creep that exploited the Muslim encoded religious hatred of Jews to do all he could to keep Jews from returning to their Homeland before and after WWII. The notorious figure was Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini who managed to squirrel his way with British help to become the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. This nefarious individual actually hooked up with Adolf Hitler himself to find Nazi support in aiding der Further in the Nazi Final Solution for Jews in the Muslim world. Husseini began by recruiting Bosnian Muslims to be Muslim Waffen SS Jew exterminators in the Eastern European area in what would be a Communist Yugoslavia after WWII.

VIDEO: Nazi Palestinians and the holocaust: the muslim Bosnian Waffen SS

Posted by Rauhanuskontoko

Posted on Apr 4, 2012

Nazi palestinians: Heinrich Himmlers and mufti Haj Amin Al-Husseinis plan to exterminate the jews. Palestinians and the holocaust: the muslim Bosnian Waffen SS

Egyptian Yasser Arafat who eventually led the PLO and then the PA, a consummate terrorist in his own right was an early disciple of al-Husseini at age 16. Arafat hero worshipped the old Grand Mufti so much that some sources list Arafat as a nephew, others as a distant cousin and others as a close hero worshipper.

And now it is time to read the MEQ story on the founder of modern Muslim Jew-hatred – Muhammad Haj Amin al Husseini (or the remarkable amount of alternative spellings).

JRH 6/26/15

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Hajj Amin Husseini’s Anti-Semitic Legacy

By Boris Havel

Summer 2015

Middle East Quarterly

The Jerusalem mufti, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini (left), meets with SS-Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler, April 1943.

The Jerusalem mufti, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini, leader of the Palestinian Arabs from the early 1920s to the late 1940s, is widely known for his close collaboration with the Nazis during World War II. Aspects of the collaboration remain to be more thoroughly scrutinized.[1]However, and without discounting his culpability for the collapse and dispersal of Palestinian Arab society (or al-Nakba, the catastophe, as it is called by Palestinians and Arabs), Hajj Amin’s role in shaping Muslim perceptions of Jews might be a far more important and lasting legacy than his political activism in Palestine, Germany, or elsewhere.[2] An important source supporting this fact is a booklet he authored for Muslim soldiers enlisted in the Nazi SS division in Bosnia.

During the mufti’s stay in Berlin in 1941-45, he befriended Hitler’s right-hand man, Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler. Himmler’s fascination with Islam and the mufti’s zealous support for the Nazi cause resulted in several common enterprises, notably the establishment of a volunteer Waffen-SS division in Bosnia, made up mostly of Bosnian Muslims, later named the Handzar division. Most books about the division display photographs of its soldiers—distinguishable by its insignia on uniform lapels and fez headgear—reading a booklet titled Islam und Judentum—most certainly the German version of the mufti’s Croatian or Bosnian pamphlet Islam i židovstvo (Islam and Judaism).

In whatever language the pamphlet was originally written, the intended readers were Muslims (Bosnian or otherwise) and not Germans. This author has been unable to locate a German copy of the pamphlet, but it is reasonable to regard the text written in the language of the Bosnian Muslims (at the time called Croatian) as the most relevant. A translation of the booklet is presented below, followed by an analysis of its significance and far reaching implications.[3]

Islam and Judaism (Islam i židovstvo)

For us Muslims, it is unworthy to utter the word Islam in the same breath with Judaism since Islam stands high over its perfidious adversary. Therefore, it would be wrong to carry out comparison of those two generally different counterpoints.

Unfortunately, it is insufficiently known that animosity between Islam and Judaism is not of a recent date. It reaches long back in history, all the way to the time of the Prophet Muhammad. This short historical overview will demonstrate the importance and perfidiousness of Jewry and its animosity toward the founder of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad.

Jews are known in history only as a subjugated people. Their vulgar[4] nature and insufferable stance toward the nations that offered them hospitality, and toward their neighboring nations, are the reason that those same nations had to resort to [certain] measures in order to suppress a Jew’s efforts to obtain his[5] desire by force.

The history of antiquity shows us that the pharaohs were already forced to use all means against Jewish usury and Jewish immorality. Ancient Egyptians finally expelled the Jews from their land. Led by Moses, the Jews then arrived in the Sinai desert.

Arab theologian Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari [839-923 C.E.] narrates that the Jews even wanted to kill their leader and savior Moses when he came back from Mount Sinai. Because of that, God punished them, and they had to meander in the wilderness for forty years. It should have brought them to their senses, and the new generation should have been cleansed from the low esteem of their fathers.

Following that, the Jews spread like locust all over the Arab peninsula. They came to Mecca, to Medina, to Iraq, and to Palestine, which is the land of milk and honey. The group of the Jews that came to Syria and Palestine was now under Roman rule. The Romans, however, soon discerned the peril that threatened the land from the Jews, and so they introduced harsh measures against them. Besides that, a serious, contagious illness of plague erupted, which was by common opinion brought into the land by Jews. When even medical doctors stated that the Jews were indeed the source of the infection—and their opinion was obviously correct—there arose among the people such upheaval against the Jews that many Jews were killed. In addition, that event is the reason why the Jews have been called “microbes” in Arabia to this very day.

The mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammad Hajj Amin Husseini, visits the volunteer Nazi Waffen-SS division in Bosnia, made up mostly of Bosnian Muslims. The mufti was instrumental in the division’s formation.

The Arabs have a particular understanding for introducing forceful measures against Jews in Germany and for their expulsion from the country. After the [First] World War, England and America enabled the Jews to settle in Palestine and to establish a Jewish state there. Jewish excrement from all countries assembled there, rascally striving to seize the land from Arabs. And indeed, they succeeded in buying land from the poorest of the poor and from unscrupulous landlords. By doing so, they took poor widows’ bread and stole food from children to fatten themselves.[6] When the Arabs opposed the Jewish settlement, the Jews did not shun bloody murders. So they robbed many families of their livelihood and threw the families into misery and troubles. (God will punish them for those disgraceful deeds).

The Jewish struggle against Arabs is nothing new for us, except that as time passed, the location of the battlefield changed. Jews hate Muhammad and Islam, and they hate any man who wishes to advance the prosperity of his people and to fight against Jewish lust for possessions and Jewish corruption.

Struggle between Jews and Islam began when Muhammad fled Mecca to Medina where he created the base for the development of Islam. At that time, Jews were merchants, already permeated with guile, and they understood that Muhammad’s influence, in both the spiritual and business spheres, could turn into a danger for them. Thus they were possessed by a deep hatred toward Islam; hatred that intensified as Islam was growing more solid and powerful. The Jews breached the agreement they had concluded with Muhammad in Khaibar, of which we shall speak later. Moreover, their rage grew immensely when the Qur’an revealed the deepest inclinations of their soul, their heartlessness, and unscrupulousness by which their ancestors had been commonly known. At that time, the Jewish methods were already the same as they are today. Their weapon has been, as always, slander and quarrel, and so they attempted to humiliate Muhammad in the eyes of his followers. They claimed that he was a deceiver, an enchanter, and a liar. When they did not succeed in this, they attempted to undermine Muhammad’s honor by spreading a rumor that his wife Aisha committed adultery. The purpose of spreading such a rumor was to sow doubt in the hearts of Muhammad’s followers.

When that failed, they tried to show Muhammad’s teaching in a bad light. With that purpose, several Jews converted to Islam; only a few days later, they returned to the Jewish faith. When asked why they changed their mind so suddenly, they replied that they were very willing to settle in Islam but found that all of it is nothing but a lie. The following Qur’anic verse alludes to that:

Many of those knowledgeable in the Scriptures attempt to somehow render you infidels again by converting to our religion. It was, though, nothing but their souls’ envy, when they comprehended truth.[7]

When the Jews understood that they would not reach their goal by the means used until then, they started to ask Muhammad various meaningless and unsolvable questions. Thus, they wanted to convince others that Muhammad was poor in knowledge and wisdom. However, that method achieved no success. As they were thus persuaded that Islam was deeply rooted in the hearts of the Muslims, they commenced with the attempts to destroy the Muslims. Pursuant to that goal, they paid some non-Muslim tribes to fight against Muhammad. The almighty God, however, wanted it differently. With iron fist, Muhammad defeated the rebellious tribes and conquered their city. The Jews could not bear such a defeat, and so they decided to destroy Muhammad in every way. They hired men to murder him.

The Medina Jews lived in the city district of Banu Nadir. When Muhammad came to Medina, he concluded a contract with them. One day he set out to that city district, accompanied by only ten companions, to talk to the Jews and to try to convert them to Islam. Muhammad explained the principles of Islam to the Jews, and they seemed very interested and open-minded. Yet as Muhammad was talking in a friendly way with some of the Jews, another group prepared an attempt on his life. They persuaded a man to throw a piece of rock on Muhammad’s head. Surely Muhammad would have been killed were it not for God, who warned him. An inner voice advised him to leave that place, and so the treacherous Jews could not carry out their design. Consequently Muhammad sent a companion to deliver his message to the Jews to leave the city within ten days. They had breached the contract they concluded with him by trying to take his life. Any Jew found in the city after those ten days would be punished by death.

However, some of the Jews, who outwardly accepted Islam but in their innermost remained Jewish, persuaded other Jews not to leave the city. When the ten days passed, Muhammad was forced to expel the Jews from the city by armed force. Part of the Jews fled to Khaibar and part to Syria.

The Jews who fled to Khaibar, however, would not concede defeat and decided to avenge themselves on Muhammad. For that purpose, they turned to other Khaibar Jews and to the Jews of Taima and of Wadi Qura. Together they plotted a conspiracy: With large sums of money, they agitated non-Muslim Arab tribes to attack Medina. When Muhammad discovered their plan he quickly armed his men and set out toward the plotters’ base in Khaibar. Muhammad’s companions captured Khaibar and expelled most Jews from the site. With the remaining Jews, Muhammad concluded a contract by which peace was guaranteed.

Only after that devastating defeat [of the Jews] could an Islamic Empire peacefully develop. But when one takes into account the Jewish significance, it was not to be wondered that Jews, in spite of the agreements made, did not abandon their plans and continued to try to destroy Muhammad by all available means. They invited him to a feast, and he accepted the invitation suspecting no evil. In front of him was placed a roasted lamb prepared by the Jewess Zainab, wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam.[8] The [topic of] conversation around the table was the contract and a peaceful life in mutual agreement in which they now lived. Muhammad had not the slightest suspicion about treason. The Prophet and his faithful companion Bashr ibn Bara each took a piece of lamb meat. Muhammad, however, did not swallow his bite because its taste made him suspicious.

“The bone tells me that the lamb was poisoned,” he said and called the Jewess Zainab to ask whether the meat had been poisoned. She answered, “You know I am highly esteemed by the Jews, and I acknowledge that I have poisoned the lamb. In so doing, I thought that if you were a king, I would only kill a king, but if you were indeed a prophet, you would know that the meat had been poisoned.”

Muhammad’s companion soon succumbed to the poison’s effect, whereas Muhammad, despite spitting the poisonous bite, later suffered various health disorders, and the impact of the poison had always been evident. Some historians even believe that Muhammad’s death was a consequence of that poisoning. In this matter, they refer to a hadith by Abu Huraira, whereby the Prophet said shortly before his death, “The effect of Khaibar’s feast will manifest in me until I die!”[9]

We, the Muslims, must always bear in mind the Khaibar feast. If the Jews betrayed Muhammad in such a way, why wouldn’t they treacherously persecute us today with the purpose of destroying us?!

Many books about the Waffen-SS division in Bosnia display photographs of its soldiers reading a booklet titled Islam und Judentum—most certainly the German version of the mufti’s Croatian or Bosnian pamphlet Islam i židovstvo (Islam and Judaism). The booklet offers a stark illustration of the lengths taken by the mufti to demonize Jews and Judaism and clearly was produced for propaganda and incitement purposes.

Now, the Jews were persuaded that Muhammad was immune to their attacks. Therefore, they made a decision to spread discord among the Arab tribes, so as to break the power of Islam. When Muhammad went back to Medina, he succeeded in reconciling the Arab tribes of Kawsha and Karasha,[10] which had been fighting each other ceaselessly for 120 years. In doing so, he significantly strengthened Islam’s position. Members of those two [formerly] hostile tribes became brethren in Islam, and peace
entered the city. In this regard, the Jews tried to undermine the Islamic empire.

A revengeful old man by the name of Shas ibn Qais one day walked with his friends and came across an assembly of the reconciled tribes held in city square. He could not bear to see how [the members of] those two tribes, formerly at war with each other, now communicated nicely, and so devised a hellish plan. He sent to their assembly a friend of his, knowledgeable in war poems, and persuaded him to recite some of his old poems that were full of hatred. That Jew, an outstanding orator, came indeed to the assembly and started to recite old war poems of both tribes. By doing so, he managed to find in each tribe a man in whom old hatred flared up. Those two men started to fight each other and then urged their fellow-tribesmen to take up arms. An immense tragedy would have ensued were it not for Muhammad, who learned about the fight amongst brethren and hurried up to the battlefield.

“Oh my God, are the old times returning even while I am still amongst you!” he shouted. “When I gave you Islam as religion, the old fratricidal discord was buried, and you became brothers in your hearts. Do you wish to slip into infidelity again?”

Both tribes understood that disturbances among them were sown by the Jews alone. They threw away their weapons and asked God for forgiveness, and then they hugged each other and concluded a new brotherly alliance. Regarding Shas ibn Qais the Jew, it is said in the Qur’an,

Oh, you scribes,[11] why do you prevent the believer from walking on God’s path when you are witnesses yourselves? But God is not blind for what you do.[12]

Regarding the tribes of Kawsha and Karasha, the Qur’an said,

Oh, you who believe, would you listen to those who received the Scripture, so that they would turn you into unbelievers again, after you have received faith! How can you be infidels when God’s words were read to you, and his apostle is among you? He who holds unto God has already been introduced to a straight path.[13]

Notwithstanding their attempts, the Jews never succeeded in spreading division among Muhammad’s followers and in dragging them back into infidelity. However, even after all these events should have taught them the futility of their efforts, they persistently continued to carry out their devilish plans. Once, they tried by deceit to even bring down Muhammad himself.

There was a quarrel between two Jewish tribes, and the side that was wrong held an assembly and sent its leaders to Muhammad. Those Jewish leaders said to Muhammad, “You know that we are influential people. If you support us in our dispute with our opponents, we will apply all our influence to make all Jews convert to Islam.” Muhammad, of course, dismissed them. There is a verse in the Qur’an about this event:

Be careful to make decisions according to what God has revealed and not to consider their desires. Keep your guard toward them so that they would not even partially shift you from what God has revealed to you. If they rebel, know that God will surely punish them for a part of their sins. There are, indeed, many men who are evildoers.[14]

Another example of Jewish subversive action was recorded by Ibn Abbas. At the time when Muhammad went from Mecca to Medina, prayers were directed toward Jerusalem. However, it lasted only for seventeen months. Then Muhammad received God’s revelation that the direction of prayers should be Mecca, and ever since, prayers are uttered with faces turned to Mecca. The Qur’an says about this:

We see how you turn your face toward heaven, and we would like to give it a direction which you will like: Turn your face toward the holy place of prayer; wherever you find yourselves, turn your face in that direction. Don’t you see that even those who had received the Scripture know that it is the truth before their Lord? And God is never heedless of what they do.[15]

When the Jews found out about this Qur’anic verse, they were angered and asked Muhammad to return to the previous direction of prayer, which was Jerusalem. Were he to do so, they promised, all Jews would accept Islam. Muhammad, however, did not allow himself to be led astray by such a proposal and to transgress against God’s command. We find the following in the Qur’an about that:

The direction to which you used to turn in prayer until now we have changed only for the purpose of distinguishing those who follow apostles from those who turn on their heel. That was surely difficult but not for those led by God. And God does not want to destroy your faith because God is full of goodness and compassionate to men.[16]

Here is another example how the Jews did not hesitate to stab Muhammad in the back at the time of his utmost distress. When Muhammad won the Battle of Badr, he sent a messenger on his own camel, because that camel was the fastest, to carry the news about his victory to Medina. The Jews, however, tried to bring confusion into the Muslims’ ranks by spreading false rumors that Muhammad had been killed in the battle. As evidence, they pointed out that Muhammad’s camel returned to the city with another rider.

When even that design failed, the Jews turned to Mecca to incite Muhammad’s enemies against him. Moreover, they declared their readiness to support the Meccans in their fight against Muhammad with an army of theirs. When the pagans of Mecca asked the Jews—since the Jews had received the Holy Scripture even before Muhammad—whether or not Muhammad’s religion was good, the Jews answered, “You know that we are men of letters. Believe us, therefore, when we tell you that your religion is much better.” The following verse is in the Qur’an about this:

Don’t you see those who received the Scriptures? They believe in Jibt and Taghut [superstition and idolatry], but they nevertheless say about pagans that their way is better than believers’ way. Those are the ones whom God has cursed, and he who was cursed by God cannot be helped.[17]

As we see, that curse came true. Without a homeland, the Jews are scattered throughout the whole world, and nowhere do they find true help and support. Another Qur’anic verse reads:

You will certainly find out that the greatest animosity toward the believers foster the Jews and the pagans.[18]

That idea has been even better expressed by words of Muhammad: “It will never be possible for you to see a Muslim and a Jew together without secret intention in the [heart of the] Jew to destroy the Muslim.”[19] Abu Huraira passed to us the following hadith:

Judgment Day will not come before the Muslims completely destroy the Jews, and when every tree with a Jew hidden behind will say to the Muslim, “There is a Jew behind me, kill him!” Only the gharqad tree, which is a small bush with many thorns growing around Jerusalem, will not participate in it because it is a Jewish tree! [Bukhari-Muslim VIII, p. 188].

Assessing the Pamphlet

The booklet Islam and Judaism offers a stark illustration of the lengths taken by the mufti to demonize Jews and Judaism. Qur’anic passages are freely paraphrased without reference to sura and verse while apparent quotations (like those about Jews converting insincerely to Islam in order to drag Muslims away from their faith) are nowhere to be found in the Qur’an, certainly not in the translation by Muhammed Pandža and Džemaluddin Čaušević[20] used by Yugoslav Muslims since 1937. Indicating the pamphlet’s clear propaganda and incitement purpose, this sloppiness reflected both Hajj Amin’s poor religious credentials and his apparent conviction that the pamphlet would not be subjected to critical scrutiny or even read by believers well-versed in the Qur’an. For, though bestowed with the title of Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mandatory Palestine’s highest religious authority, it was common knowledge at the time that Hajj Amin did not possess the necessary religious credentials for such a lofty post. Indeed, he even failed to make the final short-list for the mufti’s post having received only nine of the electors’ sixty-four votes; but the Husseinis and their British champions forced one of the final three candidates to step down in his favor, paving the road to his appointment.[21]

Some of the pamphlet’s assertions indicate the mufti’s deficient familiarity with Islamic history and theology. Nor was Hajj Amin averse to introducing novelties and fabrications for the purpose of defaming Jews. His text contains details with an unconventional interpretation of Qur’anic accounts, some of them erroneous. He accuses the Jews of having “attempted to undermine Muhammad’s honor by spreading a rumor that Muhammad’s wife Aisha committed adultery.” But renowned Islamic scholars, including Tabari, to whom the mufti refers in the booklet, do not mention the Jews at all in the context of this event: Aisha’s accusers were all Arabs. Some came from the tribe of Kharzaj; at least one was from the Quraish, Muhammad’s tribe, and another was the sister of Muhammad’s wife. Their names are listed in both Ibn Ishak’s and Tabari’s accounts of the event. After God revealed Aisha’s innocence to Muhammad, some of the accusers were punished by flogging.[22]

Furthermore, the mufti claimed that Muhammad attacked Khaibar because its Jews bribed Arab tribes to attack Medina. The sources, however, do not mention any such activity by the Khaibar Jews. Khaibar was in alliance with the Arab tribe of Ghatafan—which at this point seemed to be rather defensive—with the Quraish, and with the Persians. Muhammad’s attack occurred shortly after he concluded the peace of Hudaibiya (March 628) with the Meccans. It is hard to envisage that Muhammad’s enemies would plot an attack from the north without Meccan support. On the contrary, it seems that he concluded the peace of Hudaibiya to secure his southern front so as to be able to attack the Khaibar Jews, whose Persian allies had just been defeated by the Byzantine army.[23]

There remains a deep connection between Islamism and Nazism based on the common characteristics of racism, nationalism, religious bigotry, and intolerance. Hitler’s Mein Kampf has been a bestseller for years in predominantly Muslim countries, including the Palestinian Authority and Turkey.

There was, however, an event reminiscent of the mufti’s story that occurred a year earlier. The Jews of Medina had invited the Quraish and Ghatafan tribes to attack Muhammad. It was at this point, after the Battle of Badr, that the Quraish asked the Jews whose religion was better, theirs or Muhammad’s. Encouraged by the Jews, the two tribes marched on Medina, and their subsequent abortive attack came to be known as the Battle of the Ditch. After their retreat, Muhammad attacked Medina’s Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza.[24] It seems likely that the mufti—unless he intentionally invented stories, a possibility that cannot be ruled out—confused the episode of the Banu Quraiza with that of Muhammad’s war on Khaibar.

Far more important than these technical details and idiosyncratic interpretations are the novelties the pamphlet introduces in Islamic political discourse regarding the Jews. By combining the Islamic canon with pre-Christian and Christian anti-Judaism, it attributes strengths and powers to Jews that cannot be found in Islamic tradition by portraying them as far more cunning and successful in their vicious designs than previous mainstream Islamic thought had recognized or permitted.

A simpler example of this anti-Jewish eclecticism can be found in the mufti’s accusation that Jews brought plague to Arabia. This statement evokes medieval European myths with similar themes. More significant is the notion that Muhammad’s death might have been a result of poison given to him by a Khaibar Jewess.

To be sure, Ibn Ishak and Tabari do mention how during the illness that led to his death Muhammad spoke to Umm Bashr, mother of his poisoned companion, and complained about his pain, caused by poisonous meat he had tasted three years earlier.[25] However, in classic Islamic thought, this tradition was not interpreted as proof that the Jewess had succeeded in her attempt on the Prophet’s life but as a desire to attribute to the Prophet the highest of virtues: martyrdom. In Ibn Ishak’s words, “The Muslims considered that the apostle died as a martyr in addition to the prophetic office with which God had honored him.”[26] Tabari repeats this explanation, as does Ibn Kathir (1300-73), who referred to eight different hadiths asserting that Muhammad had been warned by God about the poison: proof of his being a genuine prophet. Conversely, Ibn Kathir states that “the Messenger of God died a martyr.”[27]

The core theme of all these traditions is the Prophet’s martyrdom and not the Jews’ lethal craft; the reader is left with the clear impression that the two phenomena were unrelated. In contrast, the mufti’s pamphlet establishes the link and changes the emphasis from the Prophet’s virtue to the Jews’ mendacity. Apparently, his intention was to draw parallels with Christian traditions regarding Christ’s killing by the Jews. This accusation was intended to provoke more anger among Muslims, but it also violated Islamic tradition and theology.

The implications of the mufti’s claim that the Jews were successful in killing Muhammad despite God’s warning imply that Jews possess the power to defy God’s will. Such a blasphemous thought would be worse than Christian accusation of deicide. Jesus overcame death, and by his suffering, death and resurrection brought salvation to his community of believers; however, Muhammad not only remained dead but also failed to appoint his successor due to the rapid progression of his illness and his sudden, untimely demise. Consequently, the umma was split by different claimants to authority, and the dispute eventually led to the fiercest internecine strife in the history of early Islam, known as the fitna.

While the mufti’s Palestinian successors would not tire of reiterating this story (as late as November 2013, Palestinian Authority minister of religious affairs Mahmoud Habbash claimed that Yasser Arafat was poisoned by the Jews just as they had poisoned the Prophet Muhammad to death),[28]most contemporary Islamic scholars have a different understanding of this hazardous theology; inasmuch, the accusation that the Jews killed the Prophet has largely faded as a theological theme with mainstream Islamic commentary viewing the Jews, along the Qur’anic derision, as “adh-dhilla wa-l-maskan,” translated by Yehoshafat Harkabi as “humiliation and wretchedness.”[29] Bernard Lewis further explained:

The outstanding characteristic, therefore, of the Jews as seen and as treated in the classical Islamic world is their unimportance. … For Muslims, he might be hostile, cunning, and vindictive, but he was weak and ineffectual—an object of ridicule, not fear. This image of weakness and insignificance could only be confirmed by the subsequent history of Jewish life in Muslim lands.[30]

Departing from this conventional view, the mufti did not interpret contemporary events as a new historical phenomenon to which Muslims should respond in a new, ad hoc manner. Instead, he traced Jewish accomplishments of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, and the alleged Jewish power and ambitions, to supposed Jewish activities at the time of Muhammad. In doing so, he created a precedent, later followed by prominent Islamic actors in the Middle East and elsewhere, particularly after Israel’s stunning military victories over its Arab adversaries. Thus Hamas accuses the Jews of “wiping out the Islamic caliphate” by starting World War I and of starting the French and the communist revolutions, establishing “clandestine organizations” and financial power so as to colonize, exploit, and corrupt countries.[31] Likewise, former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Muhammad accused Jews of ruling the world by proxy.[32] Attributing such gargantuan accomplishments to the Jews, many of them at the expense of Muslims, presents a theological innovation with an immediate political consequence. Linking early Islamic with medieval Christian depictions of Jews results in their portrayal as “a demonic entity,” thus making their “extermination legitimate.”[33]

++

Boris Havel holds an M.A. in comparative religion from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Ph.D. in international relations and national security from the University of Zagreb. He works at the Croatian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and teaches at the Biblical Institute, Zagreb, Croatia. His most recent book is An Overview of the History of Israel: From Abraham to the Modern State (Izdanja Antibarbarus, 2015).

[Foot Notes]

[1] Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers, Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews in Palestine, trans. Krista Smith (New York: Enigma Books in Association with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2010), p. viii.

 

 

[2] Boris Havel, “Haj Amin al-Husseini: Herald of Religious Anti-Judaism in the Contemporary Islamic World,”The Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 3 (2014): 221-43.

 

 

[3] The following text has been translated from the original pamphlet: Veliki Muftija Jeruzalemski Hadži Emin el-Huseini, Islam I Židovstvo (Zagreb: Hrvatski tiskarski zavod, 1943). I wish to thank the staff of the National and University Library in Zagreb for tracing the booklet. The Qur’anic verses and hadith are translated as they appear in the original text.

 

 

[4] The word “prostačkoj” can also be translated as: obscene, dirty, or indecent.

 

 

[5] This word was written in singular in the original text and introduces the notion that the average Jew was such; by referring to “a Jew,” the author refers to the whole people.

 

 

[6] The mufti fails to note that prominent members of his own family, including his father, were among the “unscrupulous landlords” selling plots of land to the Jews. See Efraim Karsh, Palestine Betrayed (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010), pp. 15-19.

 

 

[7] Sura 2:109.-Ed.

 

 

[8] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s “Sirat Rasul Allah” by A. Guillaume(Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2004; repr., 1967), p. 516; Tabari, The History of al-Tabari [Ta’rikh al-Rusul Wa-l-Muluk] (New York: State University of New York Press, 1987-97), vol. VIII, pp. 123-4.- Ed.

 

 

[9] Bukhari’s Hadith, 4.394.-Ed.

 

 

[10] The author probably refers to the Arab tribes of Aws and Kharzaj though the transliteration (Kauša i Karaša) barely resembles those names.

 

 

[11] The word “pismenjaci” refers to the “People of the Book” (sljedbenici knjige in Čaušević-Pandža).

 

 

[12] Sura 3:99.-Ed.

 

 

[13] Sura 3:99-101.-Ed.

 

 

[14] Sura 5:41-5.-Ed.

 

 

[15] Sura 2:144-9.-Ed.

 

 

[16] Sura 2:142-3.-Ed.

 

 

[17] Sura 4:51-5.-Ed.

 

 

[18] Sura 5:82.-Ed.

 

 

[19] There is no Qur’anic verse with this message. The mufti perhaps refers to a non-canonical hadith or obscure tradition.

 

 

[20] Muhammed Pandža and Džemaluddin Čaušević (eds.), Kuran, Sedmo Izdanje (South Birmingham: Islamic Relief, 1937-89). Though the Qur’an condemns those who falsely feigned Islamic belief (e.g., sura 2:8-9, or sura 63), this condemnation does not specifically apply to the Jews but rather to the wider category of “hypocrites.”

 

 

[21] Karsh, Palestine Betrayed, p. 17; David Dalin and John Rothmann, Icon of Evil: Hitler’s Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam (New York: Random House, 2008), p. 252.

 

 

[22] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad, pp. 492-9; Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol. VIII, pp. 57-67; Qur’an: sura 24:11-26.

 

 

[23] Michael Lecker, “The Hudaybiyya-Treaty and the Expedition against Khaybar,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 5 (1984), pp. 1-12.

 

 

[24] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad, pp. 450-69.

 

 

[25] Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, vol VIII, p. 124.

 

 

[26] Ibn-Ishak, The Life of Muhammad, p. 516.

 

 

[27] Ibn-Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), trans. Trevor Le Gassick (Reading: Garnet Publishing, 2000-06), vol. 3, pp. 283-7.

 

 

[28] Palestinian Authority TV, Nov. 8, 2013; “PA: Arafat was poisoned by Jews like Islam’s Prophet Muhammad,” trans. Palestinian Media Watch, Nov. 12, 2013.

 

 

[29] Yehoshafat Harkabi, Arab Attitudes to Israel (Jerusalem: Israel Universities Press, 1972), p. 220.

 

 

[30] Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites (London: Phoenix, 1997), pp. 117-39.

 

 

[31] See, for example, “Hamas Covenant 1988,” Yale Law School Avalon Project, accessed Mar. 14, 2015.

 

 

[32] CNN, Oct. 16, 2003.

 

 

[33] Moshe Sharon, Jihad: Islam against Israel and the West (Jerusalem: Moshe Sharon, 2007), pp. 77-8

_________________________

Exploring Muslim Jew-Hatred

John R. Houk

© June 26, 2015

_________________________

Hajj Amin Husseini’s Anti-Semitic Legacy

This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

©1994-2015 The Middle East Forum

DONATE

Assad is Winning Syrian Civil War


Bashar & Asma Assad voting 6-3-14

Bashar & Asma Assad voting 6-3-14

Assad is Winning Syrian Civil War

I.E. if Times of Israel Source is Accurate

 

John R. Houk

© June 6, 2014

 

I read in a Times of Israel article today that the government forces of the Shia-Alawite Syrian dictator Bashar Assad has “secured” 70-80% the Iranian client ally Syria. The source of this report is an unnamed Israeli diplomat.  

 

I’ve always had mixed feelings on the civil war in Syria. If you want an example of an Apartheid State one could say Syria fits the bill. The minority Shia-Alawite (A very secretive Shia sect ergo hard to pin down their exact beliefs: See HERE, HERE and HERE) regime ruled the majority Sunni population in Syria. Although the Assad family has ruled Syria prior to the Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iranian revolution, Bashar Assad has cozied up to the Shia-Twelver (See Also HERE and HERE) regime as a client state. This makes Syria a conduit of hate the connection between Iran and Hezbollah (Shia) ruled Lebanon. It is the military aid of Iran and the Hezbollah terrorists that have allowed Assad to survive the Sunni uprising.

 

My initial reaction to the Sunnis revolting against Assad was “fantastic”! The reason I felt that way is that a deposing of Assad would throw a monkey wrench into the geopolitical agenda of Iran to dominate the Middle East.

 

BUT THEN it became apparent the most powerful of the Sunni factions revolting against Assad were the Muslims the West categorizes as followers of Radical Islam which is essentially a politically correct term for Islamic terrorists that hate Jews and America. AND to make things even worse the Islamic terrorist Sunnis were attacking what’s left of an ancient Christian minority in Syria with convert or die ultimatums. In some cases plainly not waiting for a Christian response and simply murdering Christians in a horrific manner.

 

It is evident now that no real change in Syria would occur no matter who won the civil war. Assad’s Syria would remain a Jew-hating and American-hating client State of Iran. OR a Sunni victory would mean a Syrian-Christian genocide added to the mix of Jew-hatred and American-hatred. Assad used Conventional and Chemical Weapons on the Sunnis and the Sunnis butchered Alawite-Shias, Christians and the pseudo-Islamic Druze minority in horrific ways. Both sides of that civil war are guilty of what the West via the old Geneva conventions would call war crimes. But hey, the only reason a Muslim nation participates in the Geneva Conventions anyway is so that there is a flow of commerce between Islamic nations and the West (cough – can you say “oil”?).

 

Honestly as long as Assad sees the Syria-Christians as a political asset and protects them I am at least temporarily leaning toward his side winning. If it wasn’t for the Christians, I could care less who wins that civil war. I only can pray the U.S. Intelligence Community finds a way to exploit the Syrian civil war to the benefit of American National Interests and for the National Interests of the American ally Israel.

 

JRH 6/6/14

Please Support NCCR

****************************

Syria’s Assad has won civil war, Israeli diplomatic official says
Regime has secured ’70-80 percent of essential’ territory in the country and benefits from mass refugee exodus, source says

By MITCH GINSBURG

June 5, 2014, 11:46 pm

Times of Israel

Syrian President Bashar Assad, with Iran’s help, has attained most of the regime’s territorial goals and effectively won the civil war against the Sunni rebel forces, an Israeli diplomatic official told The Times of Israel on Thursday.

 

“Assad has secured 70-80 percent of essential Syria,” the official said, sketching a line from Aleppo in the north down through Hama, Homs, Damascus and the southern areas near Jordan and the city of Dara’a – a Syrian city where the war began and, currently, a channel through which Sunni extremists enter Syria from Jordan.

The capital, too, he said, remains very much in the hands of the regime. “The existential threat on Damascus has been lifted.”

 

Only the Kurdish regions have slipped irretrievably beyond Assad’s control, he added.

 

The official’s depiction of the situation in Syria contradicts an assessment given by a top defense official, who in May told several journalists that Assad’s forces have lost the entire Golan Heights, aside from Quneitra and one enclave, and that, “In Aleppo, in Damascus, in the north near the Turkish border, in the Golan Heights – in all of these places he is losing.”

 

The war in Syria has claimed some 165,000 lives since its outbreak in March 2011 and forced millions of Syrian’s to flee their homes and their country. Lebanon, for instance, has been radically altered by an influx of 1.5 million Syrian refugees who currently constitute 25 percent of the Lebanese population.

 

The diplomatic official said that the Sunni exodus from the country has “changed the demography in Assad’s favor,” and suggested that Assad, who has the support of most of the Druze and Christian minorities in Syria, did relatively poorly in this week’s national election, if one takes into account, among other factors, the nearly seven million displaced people and refugees who were not able to reach the ballot boxes. Assad ostensibly won over 88% of the votes, with more than 10 million in his favor. The official said he did not believe the figures, and also cited a survey suggesting that 88% of the refugees would have voted against him if they’d had the chance.

 

US Secretary of State John Kerry, noting that voting booths were stationed only in government-controlled areas, called the election “a great big zero,” because “you can’t have an election where millions of your people don’t even have an ability to vote.”

 

The Iranian influence in Syria, the Israeli diplomatic official said, was unaltered by President Hassan Rouhani’s rise to power, and a nuclear deal between Iran and the world powers, he added, will only encourage Iran to act more aggressively in pursuit of its goals in Syria.

 

The war effort is largely coordinated by Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers, he said, and carried out by loyalist troops and the 3,000-4,000 Hezbollah guerillas in Syria. A Baseej-like force of citizens loyal to the regime, the National Defense Army, has been established at the local level and is 60,000-people strong.

 

An indication of Hezbollah’s success, he asserted, was not merely the strategic territory held in places like Qusair, but the fact that in Lebanon the dominant concern today is the threat of Sunni jihadist fighters and not Hezbollah’s involvement in the civil war next door.

 

The official alluded to some of the difficult choices made by Hezbollah in recent years – the unpopular decision to fight in Syria, revealing the depth of its ideological ties to Iran and largely forsaking the fight against Israel – and said that while the Shiite terror organization is close to emerging victorious from the conflict, Israel remains very much ambiguous about its goals in the regional war. “We know what we don’t want,” he said, “but not what we do want.”

______________________________

Assad is Winning Syrian Civil War

John R. Houk

© June 6, 2014

_____________________

Syria’s Assad has won civil war, Israeli diplomatic official says

 

© 2014 The Times of Israel, All rights reserved.

ABOUT THE TIMES OF ISRAEL


The Times of Israel is a Jerusalem-based online newspaper founded in 2012 to document developments in Israel, the Middle East and around the Jewish world.

 

It was established by veteran UK-born, Israeli journalist David Horovitz and his US-based capital partner Seth Klarman. Horovitz is the founding editor, responsible for the site’s editorial content.

 

The Times of Israel has no partisan political affiliation. It seeks to present the news fair-mindedly and offers a wide range of analysis and opinion pieces.

 

We also highlight developments from Jewish communities throughout the Diaspora, and thus serve as a global focal point for the Jewish world – informing and engaging members of the tribe everywhere.

 

We aim for the site to READ THE REST

What if Japan became a Military Power Again?


Imperial Japan Re-Armed

John R. Houk

© December 27, 2013

 

Japan embarked on military campaigns in the 1930s to become an Asian political hegemon and to obtain the natural resources to maintain hegemony. The beginning of the end for Japan’s hegemonic agenda occurred when the Japanese Imperial Military attacked the U.S. Naval Base at Pearl Harbor Hawaii with the design to cripple the U.S. Navy in the Pacific. Military aggression was bad enough; however even worse things than aggression took place against innocent civilians and Prisoner of War (POW) personnel. Civilians of China, Korea, Philippines and other Asian peoples were rampaged, put into slave labor, raped, murdered, tortured and a lot of Korean gals were drafted to be pleasure girl prostitutes for the Japanese Imperial Military personnel. The American, British and the Asian nations lucky enough to have any kind of military were also tortured and brutalized as POWs.

 

Because of European Theatre of WWII and the NAZI implemented Holocaust, most Americans are cognizant of the atrocities particularly against the Jews and other groups of people that were considered genetically inferior to the NAZI super race. The Nuremberg War Crimes trials of NAZIS is prominent on documentary channels such as the History Channel and in American entertainment motion pictures. BUT did you know the Japanese treatment of conquered people may have been more brutal in its nature of execution than the Holocaust. Perhaps not as many people died as in the Holocaust (Approximately 6 million Jews and 6 million other people by race and physical limitations).

 

Apparently the Japanese Imperial Military was better at covering their tracks than the NAZIS. Genocide expert R.J. Rummel produces the number genocide victims at the hands of the Japanese to be between 3 MILLION and 10 MILLION. You can find Rummel’s research on Japan’s acts of genocide at “STATISTICS OF DEMOCIDE: Chapter 3; Statistics Of Japanese Democide Estimates, Calculations, And Sources”. Rummel uses the word “Democide” rather genocide. He defines Democide thus:

 

Democide is the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder. Democide is not necessarily the elimination of entire cultural groups but rather groups within the country that the government feels need to be eradicated for political reasons and due to claimed future threats. According to Rummel, genocide has three different meanings. The ordinary meaning is murder by government of people due to their national, ethnic, racial or religious group membership. The legal meaning of genocide refers to the international treaty on genocide, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This also includes nonlethal acts that in the end eliminate or greatly hinder the group. Looking back on history, one can see the different variations of democides that have occurred, but it still consists of acts of killing or mass murder. A generalized meaning of genocide is similar to the ordinary meaning but also includes government killings of political opponents or otherwise intentional murder. In order to avoid confusion over which meaning is intended, Rummel created the term democide for the third meaning.[7]

 

The objectives of such a plan of democide include the disintegration of the political and social institutions of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups; the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity; and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.[8]

 

Rummel defines democide as “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder”. For example, government-sponsored killings for political reasons would be considered democide. Democide can also include deaths arising from “intentionally or knowingly reckless and depraved disregard for life”; this brings into account many deaths arising through various neglects and abuses, such as forced mass starvation. Rummel explicitly excludes battle deaths in his definition. Capital punishment, actions taken against armed civilians during mob action or riot, and the deaths of noncombatants killed during attacks on military targets so long as the primary target is military, are not considered democide.[9]

 

You can read the entire article from Wikipedia (Democide; Wikipedia)

 

With this information in hand I have to ask you. Did you know that Japan has a National Shrine dedicated to their war dead that reaches back to 1867? The place honoring Japan’s war dead is called the Yasukuni Shrine.

 

Yasukuni Shrine … is a Shinto shrine located in Chiyoda, Tokyo, Japan. It was founded by Emperor Meiji to commemorate individuals who had died in service of the Empire of Japan during the Meiji Restoration.[1] The shrine’s purpose has been expanded over the years; the deities enshrined at the Honden shrine within Yasukuni currently include more than 2,466,000 individuals who died in conflicts spanning from the Boshin War of 1867 to the end of World War II,[2] and the adjacent Chinreisha “spirit-pacifying” shrine commemorates all of the dead from all wars fought worldwide throughout history.[3]The shrine also includes a war museum, Yushukan, which honors Japan’s war dead and presents a pro-Japanese narrative of World War II.[4] (Yasukuni Shrine; Wikipedia)

 

As Americans we can understand honoring our war dead for we do that as well (we just don’t deify our war dead as the Japanese do). That is what Arlington National Cemetery is for in Virginia near Washington DC. The thing that bothers the billion or so Chinese and the Koreans (North and South) and to a certain extent the U.S. government is that Japan buried notorious war criminals at Yasukuni Shrine. The big dog himself, the Japanese Premier during WWII – Hideki Tojo.

 

Here comes the most recent controversy over the Yasukuni Shrine. Yesterday Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe went to the shrine to honor Japan’s war dead in a Shinto religious ritual. On the diplomatic front the official governments of Communist China and South Korea formerly protested vehemently that the highest representative of the Japanese government essentially honored all the Japanese war dead INCLUDING WWII war criminals. The Obama Administration joined his displeasure with the Chinese and South Koreans expressing disappointment with Prime Minister Abe’s display of honor.

 

The AEI organization posted an essay on this situation entitled, “Japan officially enters Cold War with China and Korea”. That article explains that antagonism between these nations (which included nuclear armed North Korea) has been brewing for some time.

 

Here is a snapshot to look at about a brewing new military paradigm emerging among the Asian nations of the Pacific Ocean.

 

Abe’s finance minister Taro Aso, a former prime minister, declared in 2006 that there was nothing wrong with discussing whether Japan should possess nuclear arms. A Japan Times article last month, entitled “Nuclear arms card for Japan,” noted that politicians who had advocated nuclear weapons, officially and unofficially, included former prime ministers—Nobusuke Kishi (Abe’s grandfather), Hayato Ikeda, Eisato Sato, Yasuo Fukuda and Aso.

 

During the election campaign last year, Shintaro Ishihara, who was an LDP member until last year and now leads the extreme nationalist Japan Restoration Party, declared: “It’s high time Japan made simulations of possessing nuclear arms,” saying that it would be a form of deterrent against China. He has previously insisted that Japan had to have nuclear weapons.

 

The same Japan Times article reported that the Japanese government in September 2006 compiled an internal report examining “the possibility of domestically producing nuclear weapons.” A Defence Ministry source told the newspaper that the secret document had been produced by the Foreign Ministry and had aroused serious concerns in the US State Department.

 

According to the article, the report found that it would take three to five years and 200 to 300 billion yen ($US2.2 to 3.3 billion) for Japan to manufacture nuclear weapons. A significant obstacle was the impurity of the plutonium produced in Japan’s commercial power reactors. The Rokkasho reprocessing facility, which has taken more than $US21 billion and two decades to build, would be able to provide weapons-grade plutonium. No date has been set for its start up but the Japan Atomic Energy Commission and the plant’s operator, Japan Nuclear Fuel, say it could be as early as October. However, the Nuclear Regulation Authority has indicated that safety guidelines will not be ready until December.

 

 

In March and April, Washington deliberately inflamed tensions on the Korean Peninsula, provocatively sending nuclear-capable strategic bombers to South Korea, supposedly to counter North Korean threats. The US sought to use the crisis to put pressure on China for economic and strategic concessions, including to rein in Pyongyang.

 

However, the Abe government also exploited the North Korean “threat” to deploy anti-missile systems in Japan, and establish a political climate of fear to justify military rearmament—including potentially with nuclear weapons. The US is directly responsible for creating the conditions for a nuclear arms race in Asia that would enormously heighten the danger of conflict and war. (READ ENTIRETY Is Japan Developing a Nuclear Weapons Program? By Peter Symonds; Global Research; 5/7/13)

 

And Here

 

It became clear at the 28th Annual Conference of the Council on U.S.-Korean Security Studies in Seoul this past week that the DPRK’s recent escalatory rhetoric and other provocations has reinforced the concerns of some South Korean strategists about the credibility of U.S. extended deterrence guarantees in Asia.

 

As the United States becomes vulnerable to a North Korean nuclear strike, the credibility of its extended deterrence guarantees to its Asian allies is called into question. Some South Koreans, including some of the former ROK general officers at the conference, already doubt that the U.S. officials would defend them against a DPRK attack if North Korea could destroy Los Angeles in retaliation. They want to acquire their own national nuclear deterrent, whose use in response to an attack against them would be much more credible than that of a third party.

 

If more South Koreans lose faith in the U.S. willingness or capacity to defend them, or they come to fear that potential foreign aggressors doubt the credibility of U.S. assurances, then South Korea might pursue alternative security policies, including possibly seeking their own nuclear weapons. Such a move could easily prove counterproductive by harming the ROK’s relations with the United States and other countries, resulting in a net decrement to the country’s security.

 

READ THE REST (North Korean Threats Deepen Southern Nuclear Insecurities; By Richard Weitz; The Diplomat; 7/4/13)

 

And Here

 

As China rattles sabers over its newly claimed airspace in the East China Sea directly over Japanese sovereign soil, as reported by the Israeli news portal Arutz Sheva on Dec. 2, 2013, one thing that many international watchers agree would rattle China’s cage would be a militarily-allied and nuclear-armed Japan and Republic of Korea (ROK).

 

Especially a nuclear Japan and ROK independent of U.S. military control.

 

Tensions are still running high since China claimed international airspace over Japan’s Senkaku Islands, the southernmost of the 3,000 islands comprising the Japanese archipelago.

 

READ THE REST (Getting China’s attention: A nuclear-armed Japan and South Korea; Examiner.com; 12/2/13)

 

The picture here is that of a lot of Asian mistrust including the mistrust of U.S. Military capabilities to protect Japan and South Korea from an aggressive China and North Korea. AND YET due to history neither is South Korea entirely trusting with a Japan independent of the USA arming itself with nuclear weapons.

 

I see two things that could happen affecting American National Security Interests.

 

The positive: A nuclear armed Japan and South Korea means a decrease in military defense deterrence as a buffer between South Korea versus China and North Korea as well as a buffer between Japan versus China and North Korea. Lessening the commitment means lessening the U.S. budget as it pertains to the Military policing the Pacific due to our National Interests.

 

The negative: A nuclear armed Japan would flex muscles over land disputes with China and Russia and undoubted retaliate against North Korean adventurism that was not well thought out; such as the sinking of a Japanese commercial or naval vessel. Or perhaps North Korea shooting an airline pertaining to Japanese commercial or military interests. Amazingly a global war could start that has very little to do with Muslim psycho-Caliphate supporters.

 

In essence, any path the USA chooses would be a gamble, hopefully an informed and educated gamble.

 

JRH 12/27/13

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

******************************

Japan officially enters Cold War with China and Korea

 

By Michael Auslin 

December 26, 2013

Originally National Review Online

American Enterprise Institute

Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (C) is led by a Shinto priest as he visits Yasukuni shrine in Tokyo December 26, 2013.Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (C) is led by a Shinto priest as he visits Yasukuni shrine in Tokyo December 26, 2013. 

 

 

 

Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe (pronounced “Ah-bay”) has just visited Yasukuni Shrine, Ground Zero for political controversy with China and Seoul. In doing so, he has all but acknowledged that a cold war exists between Japan and its northeast-Asian neighbors China and South Korea. It’s a shot across the bow of both countries, boldly, perhaps recklessly, announcing that Japan will no longer seek better relations on their terms. Nor does he have the support of the United States. Abe is putting Japan on a path of increasing diplomatic self-reliance, but doing so with the belief that it is the right response to continued tensions with Beijing and Seoul. That it will inflame those tensions, he is well aware.

Yasukuni Shrine is somewhat analogous to Arlington National Cemetery, being the religious site where the spirits of Japan’s war dead since 1867 are commemorated. Founded in 1869 across from the Imperial Palace in Tokyo, there are nearly 2.5 million individuals enshrined there. Among them are 14 Class A war criminals from World War II, including wartime premier Hideki Tojo. These individuals were enshrined in 1978, nearly two decades after the first Class B and C war criminals were included in the shrine. Emperor Hirohito, who reigned during the war, refused to visit the shrine after 1978 and the inclusion of Tojo and others.

There was little international controversy about the shrine until 1985, when then–prime minister Yasuhiro Nakasone paid an official visit to offer prayers for the dead. The outcry forced him to abandon plans for future visits, but annual visits by popular prime minister Junichiro Koizumi between 2001 and 2006 again fanned the flames of diplomatic protest. Both Beijing and South Korea have heatedly and vehemently condemned visits to the shrine by any serving Japanese cabinet official, and especially the prime minister. While no doubt feeling true outrage over what they see as attempts to whitewash the memory of the atrocities committed by the Class A war criminals, Chinese and Korean officials have also used the shrine visits as a means of pressuring Japan and keeping it diplomatically isolated in Asia. Contemporary politics have as much to do with the furor over Yasukuni as does the historical record.

Since 2006 no serving Japanese prime minister visited Yasukuni, in part to try and stabilize relations with China and South Korea. Yesterday, a year after taking office and refraining from going to the shrine, Prime Minister Abe made an official visit. The reaction from Beijing and Seoul was swift and expected. According to the BBC, “China called the visit ‘absolutely unacceptable to the Chinese people’, and Seoul expressed ‘regret and anger’.” More surprisingly, and worryingly, the BBC reports that “the US embassy in Tokyo said in a statement it was ‘disappointed’ and that Mr. Abe’s actions would ‘exacerbate tensions’ with Japan’s neighbors.” It was a clear message that Washington doesn’t trust Abe’s judgment and may not see him as a responsible ally.

Both Beijing and Seoul will undoubtedly take comfort in the U.S. pronouncement, seeing it as a signal to pressure Tokyo and continue with their relentless attempts to isolate Japan. South Korean president Park Geun Hye has been particularly vociferous in her anti-Japanese statements, taking the opportunity during the visits of Vice President Biden and Defense Secretary Hagel to publicly chastise, if not embarrass, Japan. For those concerned over Washington’s repeated attempts to restrain Tokyo’s response to China’s provocations in the waters around the disputed Senkaku Islands, the embassy statement will seem yet another instance of the U.S. government undercutting its ally.

The real question is not what China and South Korea will do in response to Abe’s visit. The question is, rather: Why now? Abe is regularly labeled a nationalist and right-winger, by political opponents at home and anti-Japanese voices abroad, in both Asia and America. His plans to increase Japan’s defense budget and lift some of the remaining post-war restrictions on Tokyo’s ability to engage in collective self-defense, as well as undertake some controversial constitutional reforms related to civil liberties, has alarmed critics at home and abroad.

From Abe’s perspective, the trend line in northeast Asia is getting worse. He has been rebuffed for nearly a year by the South Korean president, who has met with the Chinese. Last month, China established a controversial air defense identification zone in the East China Sea that partly overlaps Japan’s own zone over the Senkaku Islands. Instead of a firm American response, Tokyo saw Vice President Biden fail to demand a repeal of the zone during his visit to Beijing. China’s military modernization and growth plan shows no sign of abating, and it is starting to develop sophisticated offensive weapons such as aircraft carriers and stealth fighters.

Thus, rather than start 2014 on the defensive, Abe seems to have decided to take the bit between his teeth. It shows he’s willing to buck his only ally, the United States, and pursue a more independent path. His visit was a message that his administration will not continue to apologize for its history, having done so numerous times in the past. It is also a signal that he will not supplicate for better relations with China and Korea at the expense of what he thinks is in Japan’s best interests. At the outer edge of interpretation, that may well mean a more muscular response to China’s interloping around the Senkaku Islands or moving ahead on strike capabilities that could target North Korea. Combining this with a push for high-level diplomatic talks with Beijing and Seoul could possibly blunt the impact of his visit, but for the foreseeable future, Japan’s relations with China and South Korea will be in a deep freeze.

___________________________

What if Japan became a Military Power Again?

John R. Houk

© December 27, 2013

___________________________

Japan officially enters Cold War with China and Korea

 

©2013 American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

Syrian Women Targeted in War for Rape, Kidnapping


A Syria girl is led inside a truck to be raped by government troops.

Girl Raped by Syrian Soldier Inside a Truck

I just read an article from the Clarion Project about women being raped in the Syrian civil war. After my quick perusal of the article the focus seems to be on Muslim women being raped and yet I am certain this is also occurring to the Christian community in Syria. According to the article 70% of the rape victims are accosted by Bashir al-Assad’s government forces. AND the other 30% of the victims are from the Syrian rebels. So in generalizing the situation the Shia-Alawite government forces are raping 70% of the women while the Sunni-Rebels are raping the other 30%. To add a little more detail to this vile picture the Shia-Alawite Muslims are the minority in Syria but have been the ruling faction for over a half a century. The Sunni majority of Syria are now fighting to rid Syria of the Assad family regime. The Sunnis of the Syrian Rebels are beginning to lean toward the Radical Islam of the Muslim Brother, the Saudi-Wahhabi sect and the ideologues of al Qaeda.

 

Due to all the undercurrents internally in Syria, American Foreign Policy choices are a nightmare. Throwing a monkey wrench into Assad’s government for a rebel win would mess up Iran regional hegemonic desires. Supporting the Syrian Rebels would most likely be like favoring a group of radical religionists that view al Qaeda as mentors in the practice of Islam and how Muslims should treat non-Muslims (e.g. Christians, Jews, Americans et al). The Radical Islam among the Syrian Rebels thus makes them like the al Qaeda that attacked America’s Homeland with homicidal-suicide Islamic terrorists that murdered over 5000 people between the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and the ill-fated flight that probably defeated their hijackers only to tragically crash in Pennsylvania.

 

JRH 11/29/13

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

Syrian Women Targeted in War for Rape, Kidnapping

 

By The Clarion Project

November 27, 2013

A Syrian woman grieves. (Photo- © Reuters)

A Syrian woman grieves. (Photo: © Reuters)

 

 

A new report issued by a human rights group on “International Day to End Violence Against Women” says Syria’s civil war “created a context ripe for violence against women, including sexual violence.”

 

The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network names the deliberate use of kidnapping and rape of women and girls, especially during “raids, at check points and within detention facilities”  as a means to pressure and humiliate family members and take revenge. Women — with their children — have also been used in the conflict as human shields.

 

Abuses against women have been a “deliberate tactic to defeat the other party from a symbolic and psychological perspective, making women desirable targets as the conflict rages on,” the report says.

 

The report cites particularly horrific instances of abuse culled from cases documented inside seven provinces in Syria as well as in Damascus.

 

One such case was that of a nine-year-old girl, who was raped in front of her family by government forces in the Baba Amr district of the central Homs province in March 2012.

 

Another case quotes a teenager, a 19-year-old named Aida from Tartus, a town in the coastal region, who was held in detention for four months, from October 2012 to January 2013.

 

One of times she was raped occurred the day before a court hearing. She was assaulted by three government soldiers. The report documents Aida’s case in her own words:

 

“The interrogator left me in the room and came back with three personnel who took turns raping me. I fiercely resisted the first but when the second started, I became more terrified and couldn’t resist,” she said.

 

“When the third started, I totally collapsed. I was bleeding all the time. As the last one finished, I fell on the ground. Ten minutes later, the prison doctor came in and took me to the bathroom where he gave me an injection to enable me to stand before the judge.”

 

Although the reports says 6,000 cases of rape have occurred since the beginning of the conflict, the actual number is believed to be at significantly higher, since many cases go unreported due to the stigma such crimes carry in Syrian society.

 

The report states that, “Syrian women exposed to sexual abuses subsequently found themselves victimized not only by the crime itself, but also by enduring the silence that surrounds the crime and the social pressure related to it.”

 

The result of reporting such a crime in Syrian society can lead to honor killing (of the victim), divorce or further abuse from family members. Many women, whose abuse has become public, have fled their communities, exposing themselves to even more danger in the worn-torn country. Abuses have also been documented in refugee camps.

 

Regime forces are said to have perpetrated 70 percent of the crimes against women, with rebel forces guilty of the the rest. Rape by government forces is a common tactic used in conflicts when the opposition forces comes from within the society and rely on civilian support, according to prominent journalist Lauren Wolfe, an expert on rape in areas of war and the director of Women Under Siege, a organization that has documented sexual violence in Syria for the last year.

 

The London-based Syrian Network for Human Rights, cites 25 cases of women being kidnapped and held hostage for use in prisoner exchanges or “to pressure their male relatives to surrender.”

 

Sema Nasar, of the Syrian Network, collected first-hand testimonies from Syrian women during from January to June of 2013.

 

To date, 120,000 people have been killed in the Syrian conflict. Figures from the first two years of the conflict show that 5,400 women were detained during those years, the whereabouts of many remain unknown.

 

Further, in many of those cases, women have been “detained indefinitely without being presented to the judge, with no access to lawyers or family, and exposed to torture and ill treatment.”

 

VIDEO: Girl Raped by Syrian Soldier Inside a Truck

 

___________________________

 Copyright © 2013 Clarion Project, Inc. All rights reserved.

 

About Clarion Project

 

SUPPORT CLARION PROJECT’S VITAL WORK

 

Hamas Lies to Justify Targeting School Bus


John R. Houk

© April 9, 2011

 

On Thursday April 7 Hamas targeted a school bus that critically wounded a thirteen year old Jewish Israeli as well as wounding the bus driver. Hamas has the audacity to claim it was a mistake, they didn’t realize it was a school bus.

 

NOW that is a load of Palestinian dung! Not only was the school bus the typical yellow stand-out, but the anti-tank missile fired by Hamas was laser guided!

 

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in near immediate fashion launched a counter-attack against Hamas Islamic terrorists. An Associated Press release I found at Yahoo News as of Saturday morning shows the IDF retaliation has killed 18 Islamic terrorists and wounded another 65 Islamic terrorists.

 

If you are a supporter of Israel’s right to exist and opposed to the Palestinian goal of wiping Israel off the map, then you have to agree this is a blatant act of terrorism. And yet – the Associated Press article does not call this an act of terrorism. The AP as is the case with most of the Western media describe such atrocities as the missile attack on the school bus and the recent butchery of the Fogel family in their own home as a mere crime of violence. Indeed in the Fogel family case the media seemed to go out of its way to justify the butchery of a Jewish family by blaming it on an Israeli occupation of Israeli land that should be known as Judea and Samaria instead the old Jordanian appellation of the West Bank that was actually occupied by Jordan via the multi-Arab-Muslim invasion to destroy Israel in 1948.

 

You have to ask, “What is the difference between a violent crime and a war crime?”

 

A violent crime is that which happens when a criminal assaults in some form of robbery or moment of hostile passion. The Hamas attack on a school bus was a calculated act with laser aimed anti-tank missiles. THAT IS A WAR CRIME!

 

I haven’t checked out all the information yet but I have to tell you I would not be surprised if the response of the IDF to the pip-squeak Hamas Islamic terrorist machine will be denounced as a war crime. I can see the denunciations of 17 Islamic terrorists being killed while Hamas missile shot at children in a school bus is described as a violent act of military insurgency.

 

Meryl Yourish of Hot Air asks, “When is a war crime not a war crime?”

 

So I ask: Is the laser targeting of a school bus a war crime or is the targeting of Islamic terrorists a war crime? The first is the targeting of innocent civilians. The later is the targeting of war criminals that live to destroy Israel and as many Jews as they can locate.

 

JRH 4/9/11

Goldstone Recants Report


Where is the Outrage?

John R. Houk

© April 3, 2011

 

Richard Goldstone owned up to the fact that Israel did not purposely target civilian Arabs that call themselves Palestinians in Operation Cast Lead targeting Hamas Islamic terrorists who had been shooting missiles into Israel that indeed targeted Israeli citizens. Hamas began that war under the hubris that shooting missiles at Israeli civilians would result into some kind terrorist concession that would benefit the Palestinian and Hamas goal of obliterating Israel and Jews. I am guessing the terrorist goal had something to do gaining the release of murdering and plotting Islamic terrorists in Israeli prisons.

 

The Goldstone Report concluded that both Hamas and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) were responsible for war crimes; however mysteriously the Goldstone Report came down with particular venom against Israel and wrote about Hamas atrocities against civilians as if it was insignificant. I mean Leftists and Muslim dominated nations wanted war crimes trials to occur at the World Court at The Hague. There was no clamor for war crimes against the initiator of the war that Israel embarked upon in self-defense.

 

Hamas not only shot missiles at Israeli civilians but also used civilian residents of Gaza (aka Palestinians) as human shields and more deplorable civilians that died as a result of Hamas insensitivity were staged (See Also HERE) as if the IDF artillery or aerial weaponry caused their deaths.

 

In light of Goldstone confessing his report was inaccurate in portraying war crimes committed by Israel, where is the global outrage of proven Hamas atrocities?

 

JRH 4/3/11