Calling Yourself Liberal and Religious won’t MAKE You a Good Person

PartyPlayFairDemo

Today we have two re-writes of older articles that seem very relevant today:

First, we will take the “Liberals” as well as the “Conservatives” to task for partisan hypocrisy…

Nowadays the word Liberal is often used as a pejorative; I often use it that way myself for good reasons.

Yet I am a moderate, and probably spend about 40% of the time cursing the idiocy of the Left, and 60% of it complaining and worrying about the Right (It is too bad there are not more real conservative minds in the Conservative camp these days.). Of the two the Conservatives tend to scare me a bit more but the Leftists in total power would be/ have been worse. But the actions of the radicals on either side do not condemn entire schools of thought to a mature mind.  This should be remembered by pundits on both sides in this age of attack politics.

 Lately a radically Conservative group has taken over almost all the political voice of conservative American Christianity.  They have used their pulpit to propound, and pound in, their own view of history, and how Christianity has influenced the development of the United States as a nation.

 They are not actually lying about the influence of the churches. The problem is that they have forgotten from just where in the Church all that influence came.  Yes, it was those damn liberals every time!

 In American history, every time the religious culture has had a profound positive influence (as judged by successive generations) on changes in society those influences have their roots in the Liberal-to-Radical churches. They most certainly did not come from the Conservative ones!

 The Conservative Churches in every case have held the line with the status quo through history whether it was regarding the Revolution, slavery, child labor, workers rights, racial equality or now, gay rights.  Yet the Conservative Churches of today want to shine their halos with the contributions made for the most part by the Liberal Churches of the past.

This activity is not unique to Christianity by any means.  A Radical Conservative Jew will spend much energy telling you about Judaism’s amazing contributions to Western society, but will refuse to see that his brand of thinking never produced any of it.  Find a Conservative Imam, and you will find a man eager to convince you that Islam has been an enormously positive contributor to civilization over the centuries.  But if you remind him that blind faithfulness to Islam’s Conservative philosophy had nothing to do with the various periods of (heretically liberal) Islamic glory that he is polishing up for you to admire; he may even take offense.

  In every case where religious and political power intermingle the things that modern world civilization would call progress has only come when the dominant Church(s) is(are) liberal to the point of being heretical (to the parent dogmas and doctrines), tolerant and more focused on understanding, accepting and spreading the “love behind the Law” rather than promoting a zero-tolerance attitude regarding adherence to the “Letter of the Law.”

But only stagnation and decay ensue when the Churches are conservative and cling to a memory, or fictitious ideal, of “the way it should be.”

 It should be noted that Conservative religious thought can have a greatly positive influence on society but, that usually the effects remain chiefly negative.

 Witness: the defense of slavery, and the stances of “Godly” preachers and priests against child labor laws, and minority civil rights laws.

Witness: the attempts at forced, coerced and violent conversions directed at any people of another religion that are under the influence of a politicized religion (theocracies, inquisitions, shari’a states).

 We all admit that Conservatism is designed to be highly successful at keeping the wheels of a society turning. Who but a fool will deny that there is a true virtue most times in maintaining most of the status quo; Leftists take note of the qualifications and keep your straw men to yourselves – I am not Christian, and never have been a Republican, or supporter of either Bush.

 But, it also must be admitted that Conservative governments and organizations have a poor track record when attempting to grease those wheels, to make accommodation for the fact that seems “odd“, “weird“, “different” to the average mind; whether the ideas are good ones or not!

When the going gets rough or to be a creative inspiration for the people who bear the main burdens of pushing the cart of civilization further, faster and safer than our ancestors ever believed it could go Conservatives can be of more a drag chain when they should be acting like the regenerative brakes that go with a hybrid engine.

 Conservative ideology certainly does not allow real flaws in the basic social system to be changed without a protracted, and often ugly, fight with the liberal mindset who are busy finding things that are not really broken to make into really nasty situations with well-meaning new laws and more, and more, and more tension from enforcement, and less and less elbow room for the well-intentioned citizen just trying to get along and improve their lives.

 Without a Liberal element in society, one that has enough influence to smack the current bosses on the head now and then but, not enough to dominate society  a person lives in what is at best a well upholstered slave camp destined to fade into the dust of history.

And…

Without a Conservative element at the core to give perspective and balance a people will… well, just look at the aftermath of every single revolution in the past – the American revolution was actually a colony revolt – it was an independently evolving, functioning society that broke away from the parent nation/culture rather than an indigenous movement to topple all the central power structures and replace them ad hoc with unproven or dis-proven but, “much better” institutions; not long after they succeed the real bloodshed is just beginning!

 Who was it again that decreed with proven ‘Holy Authority‘ that all human problems can, and may, only be solved by a totally Left-wing or totally Right-wing ideology? When did admitting that your Party’s platform cannot solve all problems if followed by “good” people?

The voting public needs to take off their trendy, strait-jackets/sheep-outfits, grow up, and look at reality – of the real kind, rather than the oh-so-importantly-unimportant political sort – and then find the ideal solutions, not the solutions that serve your political tribe while walking over everyone else’s Lives’, Liberties, and frantic Pursuits of Happiness.

For Peace, Muslim Public Affairs Council MPAC Has to Show Respect to Reality

Jewish Paelstine Israel as it was supposed to be and should be again

Jewish Paelstine Israel as it was supposed to be and should be again

And over here Virginia we have an excellent example of a seasoned political operative exercising her trade; open-faced, warmly sincere, and accidently self-serving, distortions of basic reality. Also take note of the masterly avoidance of any substantial discussion of the actual text of the speech, or, for that matter the actual reaction of Congress to Mr. Netanyahu’s words. MPAC, the Muslim Public Affairs Council has

It is no wonder Abbas said that Netanyahu’s speech before the joint meeting of Congress was a “declaration of war against the Palestinians.” The “Palestinian Narrative” demands victim status for the proper strategic placement to finally “Solve” the Nakba; Hamas is the historical and ideological heir to the Muftif of Jerusalem Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, the man who encouraged Hitler to adopt the rabidly innovative new idea for Europe’s “Final Solution”.  Husayni commanded a Nazi SS division of Muslim soldiers, only failing to implement his own Middle Eastern Holocaust because of the decline of Germany’s falling on the defensive and subsequent loss in WWII.

But, after all, Netanyahu’s adherence to the actual armistice agreement from all the way back in ‘48 is hardly a shock; Israel always was supposed to have a negotiated border based on the “Green Line” where, for the most part, troops happened to be when the final ceasefire was called. From ‘48 to ‘67 Gaza was effectively a part of Egypt and The West Bank was part of Jordan; neither country EVER made a single move, or even suggested, that the “Palestinians” needed a state of their own.

Then in ‘67 Egypt illegally blockaded Israeli shipping and sent it’s entire armored force toward the Israeli border while proclaiming to the world that it was the intention of Egypt to eliminate the state of Israel by a genocidal application of military force.

Here is a quote from Judge Stephen Schwebel, former President of the ICJ (International Court of Justice) (italics added)

“The facts of the June 1967 ‘Six Day War’ demonstrate that Israel reacted defensively against the threat and use of force against her by her Arab neighbors. This is indicated by the fact that Israel responded to Egypt’s prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, its proclamation of a blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the manifest threat of the UAR’s use of force inherent in its massing of troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of UNEF (a UN peacekeeping force “invited” to stand aside, or else by Egypt prior to the massing of the invasion force – Guy DeWhitney). It is indicated by the fact that, upon Israeli responsive action against the UAR, Jordan initiated hostilities against Israel. It is suggested as well by the fact that, despite the most intense efforts by the Arab States and their supporters, led by the Premier of the Soviet Union, to gain condemnation of Israel as an aggressor by the hospitable organs of the United Nations, those efforts were decisively defeated. The conclusion to which these facts lead is that the Israeli conquest of Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive conquest.”

On to MPAC’s all too commonly disingenuous “analysis of Mr. Netanyahu’s amazingly blunt and refreshingly honest speech…

“Last week, President Barack Obama outlined his vision for the Middle East, rooted in the principle that change is inevitable, and that democracy, human rights and self-determination will continue to ultimately move the region to a better place. For too long, dictators ran the region, many of whom deliberately held the Mid-East peace process hostage for their own personal gain and popularity.”

Well, we all know how willing the Arab states have been to sit down and hammer out a settlement, right? The following undisputed quotes paint a different picture of the Muslim attitude on the ground I am afraid…

“You understand that we  plan to eliminate the State of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian State. We will make life unbearable for Jews by   psychological warfare and population explosion….I have no use for Jews; they are and remain Jews.”
Yasser Arafat speaking to an Arab audience; Stockholm, Sweden 1996

“Whoever thinks that the intifada broke out because of the despised Sharon’s visit to the al-Aqsa Mosque is wrong. This intifada was planned in advance, ever since President Arafat’s return from the Camp David negotiations, where he turned the table upside down on President Clinton.”
PA Minister Imad Falouji, 2001

“We may lose or win [tactically], but our eyes will continue to aspire to the strategic goal, namely, to Palestine from the river to the sea. Whatever we get now cannot make us forget this supreme truth.”
Faisal Husseini, PA minister & Jerusalem PLO representative, 2001

Peace Partners, Obama said? “Not by the hair of my chinny, chin, chin. said the Little Pig”. Back to MPAC’s demonstration of psychological projection…

An important component of the President’s address was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The President did not offer anything novel regarding the conflict, but rather re-stated long-running U.S. policy regarding the 1967 borders, which both the Clinton and Bush administrations saw as a starting point for negotiations.

In response, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sat in the White House alongside Obama and called the President’s remarks on the 1967 borders “indefensible” and “throwing Israel under the bus”.  Netanyahu not only questioned President Obama’s intelligence in a 12-minute rambling diatribe in the Oval office on the history of the Middle East, but at the invitation of the congressional Republican leadership, he went so far as to rebut the President’s speech in front of both houses of the United States Congress this week.

And, it seems that much of Congress was receptive to this fresh, almost shocking openness and return to honesty in that sacred chamber. The MPAC fantasy continues…

“Unfortunately, this type of political grandstanding is nothing new from the Republican leadership in Congress. In November 2009, after meeting with Netanyahu in Israel, Republican House Majority leader Eric Cantor (leading a 25-person Congressional delegation), said that he would act as a check to the President’s policy in the Middle East. This statement was an unprecedented rebuke by a member of Congress, of an American President on foreign soil. No matter what one’s views are regarding the conflict, it is distasteful for members of Congress to volunteer themselves as theater props in order to discredit the President of the United States.”

A member? hardly; MPAC’s spin-meisteress forgot to add that 30 Representatives and 17 Senators were chosen/volunteered by the VICE PRESIDENT and Speaker of the House to be Netanyahu’s “Escort of Honor”; and yes Virginia, it was a totally bi-partisan group, including BOTH Democratic Senators from California! Oh, and then there were the 27 standing ovations, most of them loud and obviously sincere; there is an element on the Left that claims the entire U.S. Congress is so terrified of Israel that they do not feel they can be SEEN to NOT be enthusiastic, Ri-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-ght! Oh, we should also note this little piece from the Washington Post: Democrats join Republicans in questioning Obama’s policy on Israel

“No matter how long such political theater continues, the status quo will not move either side forward. Both sides have entrenched themselves.  From the Israeli side, the separation wall continues to be built on Palestinian land and illegal settlements continue to grow. The Palestinians have recently signed a unity agreement, yet there does not seem to be much movement towards a national platform for peace and the use of violence in Gaza continues to set them back.”

What a tribute to the Imagination and genius of the Republican “political theater” staff; twenty seven standing ovations from both sides of the aisle; no less enthusiastic at the end, after Congress being gently slapped in the face with reality,  than at the beginning.

“President Obama cannot produce a peace agreement on his own…”

Of course not, and if he tried I think that this same MPAC writer would likely claim that the U.S. had no right to do any such thing!

“…And while pressure is on Palestinians to make more concessions, the reality is that the Israelis can end the stalemate now if it wanted to have a peace deal.”

This is the first time I have seen “peace deal” used as a euphemism for national and ethnic suicide; given the adamantly stated goals of the Arab nations and the Palestinian “leadership” no other definition can be entertained by the sane and sober.

Here are some more historical quotes to dash a little cold water on this fantasy called the “Palestinian narrative”:

“The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it an open sore, as an affront to the UN and as a weapon against Israel.”
Ralph Galloway, Director of UNRWA, 1958

“All the Arab countries want to keep this problem looking like an open wound.”
Ana Liria-Franch, UN High Commissioner for Refugees’ regional representative to Cairo, 2003

“If Arabs return to Israel, Israel will cease to exist.”
Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egyptian President, 1961
“The demand for the return of the Palestinian refugees…is tantamount to the destruction of Israel.”
As’ad Abd-Al Rahman, Minister of Refugee Affairs – Palestinian Authority, 1999

The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians… but, instead they abandoned them and, forced them to emigrate and to leave.”
PA President Mahmoud Abbas, 1976

“We will smash the country. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.”
Prime Minister of Iraq Nuri Said, 1948

“Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave. Only a few months separated our call to them to leave and our appeal to the United Nations to resolve on their return.”
Haled al Azm, Syria’s Prime Minister, 1948-1949

“The fabricated atrocity stories about Deir Yassin were our biggest mistake…Palestinians fled in terror.”
Hazem Nusseibeh, editor – Palestine Broadcasting Service’s Arabic news in 1948

And now Virginia, back to our regularly scheduled Islamist Apologetics demonstration…

“But Netanyahu’s condescending attitude to our President and by extension our country has to end.  Jeffery Goldberg in an article entitled “Dear Mr. Netanyahu, Please Don’t Speak to My President That Way”, in the Atlantic Monthly, said, “…he [Netanyahu] threw something of a hissy fit. It was not appropriate, and more to the point, it was not tactically wise…”

Twenty. Seven. Standing. Ovations. Clearly Congress failed to realize they were being insulted. Myself I thought Netanyahu showed them respect, by simply telling the truth and not playing games with an issue that is of existential aspect to Israel. Look at this bit from…

THE WASHINGTON POST

PETER WALLSTEN

Top Democrats have joined a number of Republicans in challenging President Obama’s policy toward Israel, further exposing rifts that the White House and its allies will seek to mend before next year’s election.

The differences, on display as senior lawmakers addressed a pro-Israel group late Monday and Tuesday, stem from Obama’s calls in recent days for any peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians to be based on boundaries that existed before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, combined with “mutually agreed swaps” of territory.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) and other Democrats appeared to reject the president’s reference to the 1967 lines in his latest attempt to nudge along peace talks, thinking that he was giving away too much, too soon.

White House officials say Obama’s assertion did not reflect a shift in U.S. policy. But the president’s comments touched a nerve among pro-Israel activists, drew a rare Oval Office rebuke from Is­raeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and instantly became a litmus test in domestic American politics.

Now Obama — whom critics often accuse of employing a play-it-safe governing style in which he waits for others to take the lead — is largely isolated politically in raising the issue of boundaries…

Read It All

The MPAC writer, who, I think, must have slightly less sense than my char-lady, concludes thusly…

“It is not only the left who has been taken back by Netanyahu’s disrespect to the Oval office but even among the conservatives there is criticism of the way he has demeaned the office of the President of the United States.For peace to be a reality, respect for the White House by Netanyahu must be the first condition to any legitimate process.”

Well Virginia, I do not know why I feel disappointed, after all the whole piece up to that point was also nothing but lies, why shouldn’t the conclusion be more of the same? Here is a link to a compilation of CONGRESSIONAL comments regarding the speech… MPAC has to hate it when people actually go to the SOURCE to refute their propagandistic spin-meister/meistress.

Here is a link to the speech itself… Love it!

Methinks the Muslims Are Starting To Annoy Narcissist-in-Chief Obama

MushroomCloud2

Here we have an interesting video of Obama speaking with Netanyahu I found on Al-JazeeraEnglish at YouTube.

I am not sure Obama is happy about the response from the Muslim world on his attempts to appease them.  Maybe reality is setting in and, wonder of wonder, miracles of miracles, Obama is waking up to reality.  I doubt his Marxist-friendly version of Islam is quite what the global Muslim community is aiming for.

I think our dear President may have realized that if he allows Iran to nuke Israel only a lightening fast impeachment could save him from the angry mobs; did someone point out that the Obama name could end up being lower down in esteem of historians than the bigoted, and not-so-bright, (last in his class at West Point) Gen. Custer? IS he aware that the stain on his name could exceed that on Jackson’s for his "Trail of Tears" inflicted on the Cherokee nation?

How else can we explain his slow, but steady reversal of attitude on Israel? (If that is really what is happening, instead of simply a more effective "plausible deniability."

Here is a transcript of a recent interview with Israeli TV by Obama; other than his usual racism and self-absorption this is the most open and honest view of Israel I have seen out of the White House since the Election:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

July 08, 2010

Interview of the President by Yonit Levi, Israeli TV

Diplomatic Reception Room

(Conducted July 7, 2010)

5:23 P.M. EDT

Q    President Barack Obama, shalom, and thank you so much for talking with us today.

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.

Q    I’d like to actually open up by asking you about hope, which was such a prominent notion in your campaign and in your presidency.  And how can you convey that concept of hope to Israelis, who’ve seen so many failed attempts at a peace process?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, look, it’s always a challenge.  One of the things I used to say during the campaign but also at the beginning of my presidency is, being hopeful is not the same as being blindly optimistic.  I think you have to be clear-eyed about the situation.

And Israelis, rightly, look at the past and have skepticism about what’s possible.  They see the enmity of neighbors that surround them in a very tough neighborhood.  They see a track record of attempts at peace where, even when concessions were made, a deal could not be consummatedThey see rockets fired from Gaza or from areas in Lebanon, and say to themselves that the hatreds or history are so deep-seated that changed is not possible.

And yet, if you think back to the founding of Israel, there were a lot of people who thought that that wasn’t possible either.  And if Herzl or Ben-Gurion were looking at Israel today, they would be astonished at what they saw — a country that’s vibrant, that is growing economically at a extraordinary pace, that has overcome not just security challenges but also has been able to overcome challenges related to geography.  And so that should be a great source of hope.

Unfortunately Barry just can’t seem to stay in the real world; he prefers the warm dream of "what I want" to the somber reality of "what can be done with what we have."

Continue reading

“Islam Claims Jerusalem Too; Mideast: Supporters of Israel consistently attempt to diminish Muslims’ connection to the city.” and Other Fairy Tales

e-s_041

***UPDATE***

“What is truth?” Pilate said, and washed his hands…

Today’s complex world demands a passion for truth, by which I mean accuracy in description, not some nebulous philosophical notion subject to infinite redefinition.

Mankind has always done best when seeing clearly what was in front of our eyes and applying our creativity and will to the parts we found fun, interesting, or that quite simply sucked.  Sadly some people have always preferred to confound truth for their own short term status quotient retarding and delaying the progress of the majority.

This piece started out with me noticing an excerpt, a mere two paragraphs, from the L.A. times. The headline made me pause.  I have always loved history and the mental disconnect with what I knew stopped me in mid-click.

The headline?

Commentary; Islam Claims Jerusalem Too; Mideast: Supporters of Israel consistently attempt to diminish Muslims’ connection to the city.

Los Angeles Times – Los Angeles, Calif.

Subjects: Islam, Territorial issues

Author: RIAD ABDELKARIM; HUSSAM AYLOUSH

Date: Jul 25, 2000

At first I noticed that there was a lot of false information and misleading statements in the piece; then I tried to find any fact that was not false.  And then I looked up the background of the authors, and found that the pre-fertilizer mass descends in close proximity to the genetically spoiled cow.

First I will look at those two, wonderful paragraphs, then let us turn our attention to having a peak at what our intrepid authors have been up to for the last ten years.

Read original here;

In addition to numerous Koran references, several sayings of the Prophet Muhammad focus on the significance of Jerusalem.

From the first sentence truth and realty are very flexible for Riad and Hussam; Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Quran by name and the only reference at all I can find is to the fact that, very early in his career, he had turned away from the City of the Jews because they had rejected him; this is hardly an intimate, spiritual connection we are talking about here since the name is not even articulated!

The only other “source” of historical “proof” of the ancient connection are hadiths, or sayings of Mohammed, speaking of the al-aqsa (furthest place of worship), a religious term.  So, what happened? Let me allow Dr. Daniel Pipes, Islamic scholar, tell the tale:

“The Koran states that God took Mohammed “by night from the sacred mosque in Mecca to the furthest (al-aqsa) place of worship.” When this passage was revealed (about 621), “furthest place of worship” was a turn of phrase, not a specific place. Decades later, the Umayyads built a mosque in Jerusalem and called it Al-Aqsa. Moslems since then understand the passage about the “furthest place of worship” as referring to Jerusalem.”

However our intrepid authors do not mention this, they simply give the evolved version and move on.

In one saying, the Prophet declares that the reward or blessings for a Muslim who prays in Al Aqsa mosque is multiplied 500 times. In another saying, when asked which were the first mosques established on Earth, the Prophet replied that al Haram mosque (in Mecca) was the first, then Al Aqsa mosque (in Jerusalem). Yet another saying advises Muslims not to undertake difficult journeys except to reach three destinations: al Haram mosque in Mecca, the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, and Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.

By now anyone who had doubted the historical connection is supposed to be feeling a bit shamefaced; the blows of falsehood increase in tempo.

While maintaining a strong historical claim to Jerusalem, Muslims also recognize the importance of Jerusalem to the Christian and Jewish faiths.

As is usual with this sort of lie it is put in very reasonable terms, the reader expects things to be just as the author claims in his wounded pride for his noble past.  All is not as it seems on the surface.

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/21530 What does a popular Islamic question and fatwa (their terms, not mine) site www.islam.qa.comseems to disagree with Riad and Hussam:

“It is not permissible for a Muslim to make friends with a mushrik non-Muslim] or to take him as a close friend, because Islam calls on us to forsake the kaafirs and to disavow them, because they worship someone other than Allaah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Take not as friends the people who incurred the Wrath of Allaah (i.e. the Jews). Surely, they have despaired of (receiving any good in) the Hereafter, just as the disbelievers have despaired of those (buried) in graves (that they will not be resurrected on the Day of Resurrection)”

[al-Mumtahanah 60:13]

This was also the teaching of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

1 – It was narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say, “Do not keep company with anyone but a believer and do not let anyone eat your food but one who is pious.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2395; Abu Dawood, 4832. Abu ‘Eesa al-Tirmidhi said: this hadeeth is hasan. It was also classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi, 2519).

Abu ‘Eesa al-Khattaabi said: Rather he warned against keeping company with anyone who is not pious and against mixing with them or eating with them, because eating with a person instills friendship and love in the heart.

…(Ma’aalim al-Sunan, Haamish Mukhtasar Sunan Abi Dawood, 7/185, 186).

2 – It was narrated from Samurah that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not live among the mushrikeen [non-Muslims) and do not mix with them, for whoever lives among them or mixes with them is not one of us.” (Narrated by al-Bayhaqi, 9/142; al-Haakim, 2/154. He said, it is saheeh according to the conditions of al-Bukhaari. The hadeeth was also classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Silsilat al-Saheehah, 2/229 with its corroborating reports).

But it is permissible to deal with them in a kind manner in the hope that they might become Muslim.

That is not quiet what I usually think of as respectfor MY religion or faith.

…And Allaah knows best.”

Maybe so, maybe not, but Riad and Hussam seem to feel that it is permissible to leave the truth at the door in the hope we all might become Muslim. They are really  getting off the ground now, and the truth is far, far below the clouds…

“Centuries of peaceful Islamic rule over Jerusalem, during which Christian and Jewish religious sites were protected and preserved, illustrate the esteem in which these other monotheistic faiths are held.”

This statement could be refuted with a stack of PhD theses as tall as a house; it does not pass even a cursory inspection outside of the literature produced by the likes of CAIR and the House of Saud.

here is a short list compiled in a few minutes:

After the death of Mohammed (638) a small prayer house was built on Temple Mount, Second Jewish Temple site, almost 50 years later (688 to 691 AD) the Dome of the Rock built as well on the same site.

May 28, 1948 the Arab Legion finished capturing (temporarily) the Old Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; including  many ancient synagogues and the Western Wall of the Temple. These are and have been for approx 3,000 years, the holiest sites in the Jewish religion.
57 historic synagogues (going back all the way to the 13th century), centers of religious study and Jewish libraries were looted; 12 demolished. Religious structures that remained standing were used as housing and barns; The Western Wall became slums.

Further, the Jordanians refused access to Israeli Jews wishing to visit or worship at the Wailing Wall, Mt. Olives cemetery, Rachel’s tomb, Tomb of Abraham or any other holy places in the West Bank and Jerusalem, violating UN resolutions.

On the Mount of Olives, the Jordanian Arabs removed 38,000 tombstones, using them for paving roads, as well as construction material for latrines. After re-occupation in 1967, graves were found open, bones scattered. The cemetery had had a paved road cut though; parking lots and even a gas station were built on what had been Jewish graves. Finally, the Intercontinental Hotel was built at one end of the cemetery grounds; the Jordanian appointed caretaker built his house from stones from the ancient graves.

mo1 Here we have the Mount Olives Cemetery under Israel.

mo2d And here it is again after the Jordanians have “shown their respect

The Hurva Synagogue, built in the fifteenth century or earlier and the main synagogue for Jerusalem until  the Ottomans closed it in 1589 due to Muslim incitements; burned by Arabs(1721) it was rebuilt in the 1800’s to become a well known landmark. In 1948, when captured by the Arab Legion it was dynamited as a show of dominance over the Old Jewish Quarter.

Septemer 1996, Palestinians destroyed a synagogue at Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus, since then periodic attacks have been made on Rachel’s Tomb.
October 2000, The Israelis guarding Joseph’s Tomb were temporarily withdrawn and the shrine was torched to be rebuilt as a mosque!

20b

Let us not forget what was done to those Buddha statues!

I want to interject here a few non-Jewish examples so no one thinks this is a solely Muslim/Israel thing.

In india in the 11th century Mahmud Ghaznavi conducted raids on Temples regularly to finance his other wars.  In the early 13th Delhi Sultans carried on a policy of selective temple desecration for “political” ends. In addition to these and many, many other examples of expedient or politically motivated Temple destruction even the apologist author of Temple Destruction and Muslim States in Medieval India, Richard M. Eaton claims that spanning the period from 1192 to 1729, “one may identify eighty instances of temple desecration” that were motivated only by religious zeal and bigotry.

And then there was the Cordova Mosque, built in Cordova, Spain over the former main Visigothic Church; eventually rededicated by the Spanish as a Cathedral.

“This period of Muslim rule also demonstrates that Muslims have a proven track record of being faithful and just custodians of the Holy City. To this day, the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher are entrusted to a Muslim family.”

Oh really now? Virginia, shall we look a tad closer at the history of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher?

A quick Wikipedia search revealsa slightly different tale than one of devoted and compassionate custodianship. For one thing the aforementioned keys were stolen by the conquering Muslims, who then assigned them to the family, sort of…

“In 1192, Saladin assigned responsibility for it to two neighboring Muslim families. The Joudeh were entrusted with the key, and the Nusseibeh, who had been the custodians of the church since the days of Caliph Omar in 637, retained the position of keeping the door.”

What has been the quality of the stewardship?

“On October 18, 1009, under Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, orders for the complete destruction of the Church were carried out. It is believed that Al-Hakim “was aggrieved by the scale of the Easter pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which was caused specially by the annual miracle of the Holy Fire within the Sepulchre. The measures against the church were part of a more general campaign against Christian places of worship in Palestine and Egypt, which involved a great deal of other damage: Adhemar of Chabannes recorded that the church of St George at Lydda ‘with many other churches of the saints’ had been attacked, and the ‘basilica of the Lord’s Sepulchre destroyed down to the ground’. …

European reaction was of shock and dismay, with far-reaching and intense consequences. For example, Clunaic monk Raoul Glaber blamed the Jews, with the result that Jews were expelled from Limoges and other French towns. Ultimately, this destruction provided an impetus to the later Crusades.[16].”

Well, there we have Riad and Hussam’s 2000 article in a nutshell. Or at least the summery.  But that was 2000, what – you ask, have they been up to since? I am SO glad you asked!

It seems Riad has been to Israel where he was mistaken for a terrorist supporter and detained for a while by the IDF, Jesse Jackson Managed to get this member of THE HOLY LAND FOUNDATION released and back home to L.A. post haste. He is an internal medicine doctor but I cannot find any actual ratings for him in practice.

His partner Hussum’s website has this to say:

Hussam Ayloush is the Southern California Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations(CAIR) (see: http://www.cair.com). Mr. Ayloush frequently lectures on Islam, media relations, civil rights, hate crimes and international affairs. He has consistently appeared in local, national, and international media advocating and articulating the mainstream Muslim position on issues. Full biography at:

http://hussamayloush.blogspot.com/2006/08/biography-of-hussam-ayloush.html

As you all may know CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trials.  For such moderates it is strange just how many convicted terror supporters these men have worked with.  But, I am sure they must be sincere – horribly misinformed about history and of questionable knowledge regarding the meaning of the word “respect”; but, surely GOOD AMERICANS both!

…Right Virginia?
…Virginia?

History 101: Israel – How to Win ann Argument While Riding the Palestinian Merry-Go-Round

Take Your Jihad and SHOVE IT!

It is a tactic of pro-Palestine people (indeed of all partisans) to jump from one
argument to another as pints are raised that they are:

A. Unable to answer

or

B. Unwilling to answer.

Immediately on encountering one of these unfair logical hate-tactics the pro-Palestine (also known as the anti-Israel crowd) pundit leaps to the nearest ad hominum or personal attack they find handy; anything other than answer the point actually raised.

When they are the ones raising a point it does one no good to make a reasoned response, the pro-Palestine-ian (henceforth to be referred to as the pP’s) will simply jump to the next step on the Palestinian Merry-Go-Round.

As a public service Heretics Crusade is providing this guide to major points on the PMGR so you can make a valiant, but almost certainly futile, attempt to keep the pP’er on track:

We jump on with a response to the pP’s assertion that Israel is “collectively punishing” the Palestinians because their leaders are
responsible for violence and terrorism with the fact that those same Palestinians elected those Arabic Hitler’s and Himmler’s and Berya’s knowing their goals and attitudes toward Israel and Jews.

The pP’er next tells us that Israel has no right to isolate the Palestinians and we respond that no one makes the Egyptians and  Jordanians and Lebanese keep their borders closed to the “peace loving” Palestinians; they come back with the excuse that Israel “occupies” land that we then point out was formerly aggressively occupied by Jordan and Egypt and Syria in the course of those countries territorial-based wars of aggression in 1973, 1967 and 1948.

So then the pPer will claim that Jews Stole the Land from Arabs. OR it might berendered “stole all the good land”, but the message is the same, we had a land of milk and honey and the Jews stole it. We then respond that more than 90% of the land was purchased from absentee landlords, almost all Arabs themselves, and was barren when the Jews bought it and that it was the industry
of the Jews that MADE the land worth anything at all. We show them pictures of Israel in 18050, 1880, 1920 and 1930 and the pP’er simply says that the Jews came to the land from other lands to settle even after we show them that most of the Arab population of the 1930s were recent immigrants themselves, come for the jobs brought by the British and Zionists.

One key point that many pro-Israel people miss out on; one that leaves them vulnerable to certain arguments, is how the permission to SETTLE and be self-determining was given to the Jews in the Palestinian Mandate (which never mentioned Arabs
by name) but, that SOVEREIGNTY was not in the cards until THE ARABS rejected the rights of the Jews to live in the Mandate AT ALL. THAT is what brought about the ultimate partisan attempt by the UN that the Arabs again rejected, launching a guerilla, then civil, then conventional war against all international laws and resolutions of the time going back 70 years.

Palestinian prof: No Jewish ties to Western Wall


Latest Islamic figure to deny documented archeological history

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

JERUSALEM – The Jews have no historical connection to Jerusalem or the Western Wall, declared a Palestinian Authority lecturer on official PA television.

“[The Jews have] no historical roots. This is political terminology to win the hearts and the support of the Zionists in Europe, so they would emigrate and come to Palestine. Nothing more!” stated Shamekh Alawneh, a lecturer in modern history at Al-Quds Open University.

“The [Jews’] goal in giving the name ‘Wailing Wall’ to this [Western] Wall is political,” continued Alawneh, speaking on a PA television program called “Jerusalem – History and Culture.”

“The Jewish Zionists had no choice but to invent an excuse [about Jerusalem] to spread among the Zionists or the Jews in Europe, to connect to something concrete from the past about Jerusalem. They made false claims and called the ‘Al-Burak Wall’ the ‘Wailing Wall,” Alawneh said.

His remarks were translated from Arabic by Palestinian Media Watch.

Alawneh was the latest PA-connected official to deny the Jewish historical connection to Jerusalem and the Western Wall, which are intimately tied to Judaism. Islam largely did not consider the area holy or important until the late 19th century.

Mainstream Palestinian leaders claim the Temple Mount and Western Wall are Muslim in spite of overwhelming archaeological evidence documenting the First and Second Jewish Temples.

Last June, WND quoted the chief of staff (link:) of PA President Mahmoud Abbas claiming Jerusalem and the Temple Mount belong to the Muslims. He warned any Israeli action that “offends” the Mount will be answered by 1.5 billion Muslims.

“Jerusalem is Muslim. The blessed Al Aqsa mosque and Harem Al Sharif (Temple Mount) is 100 percent Muslim. The Israelis are playing with fire when they threaten Al Aqsa with digging that is taking place,” said Abbas’ chief of staff Rafiq Al Husseini.

In a WND exclusive interview in March 2007, Taysir Tamimi, chief Palestinian justice and one of the most influential Muslim leaders in Israel, argued the Jewish Temples never existed, the Western Wall really was a tying post for Muhammad’s horse, the Al Aqsa Mosque was built by angels, and Abraham, Moses and Jesus were prophets for Islam.

Tamimi is considered the second most important Palestinian cleric after Muhammad Hussein, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

“Israel started since 1967 making archeological digs to show Jewish signs to prove the relationship between Judaism and the city, and they found nothing. There is no Jewish connection to Israel before the Jews invaded in the 1880s,” said Tamimi.

“About these so-called two temples, they never existed, certainly not at the [Temple Mount],” Tamimi said during a sit-down interview in his eastern Jerusalem office.

The Palestinian cleric denied the validity of dozens of digs verified by experts worldwide revealing Jewish artifacts from the First and Second Temples throughout Jerusalem, including on the Temple Mount itself; excavations revealing Jewish homes and a synagogue in a site in Jerusalem called the City of David; or even the recent discovery of a Second Temple Jewish city in the vicinity of Jerusalem.

Tamimi said descriptions of the Jewish Temples in the Hebrew Tanach, in the Talmud and in Byzantine and Roman writings from the Temple periods were forged, and that the Torah was falsified to claim biblical patriarchs and matriarchs were Jewish when they were prophets for Islam.

“All this is not real. We don’t believe in all your versions. Your Torah was falsified. The text as given to the Muslim prophet Moses never mentions Jerusalem. Maybe Jerusalem was mentioned in the rest of the Torah, which was falsified by the Jews,” said Tamimi.

He said Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Jesus were “prophets for the Israelites sent by Allah as to usher in Islam.”

Asked about the Western Wall, Tamimi said the structure was a tying post for Muhammad’s horse and that it is part of the Al Aqsa Mosque, even though the Wall predates the mosque by more than 1,000 years.

“The Western Wall is the western wall of the Al Aqsa Mosque. It’s where Prophet Muhammad tied his animal which took him from Mecca to Jerusalem to receive the revelations of Allah.”

The Kotel, or Western Wall, is an outer retaining wall of the Temple Mount that survived the destruction of the Second Temple and still stands today in Jerusalem.

Tamimi went on to claim to WND the Al Aqsa Mosque , which has sprung multiple leaks and has had to be repainted several times, was built by angels.

“Al Aqsa was built by the angels 40 years after the building of Al-Haram in Mecca. This we have no doubt is true,” he said.

The First Temple was built by King Solomon in the 10th century B.C. It was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. The Second Temple was rebuilt in 515 B.C. after Jerusalem was freed from Babylonian captivity. That temple was destroyed by the Roman Empire in A.D. 70. Each temple stood for a period of about four centuries.

The Temple was the center of religious worship for ancient Israelites. It housed the Holy of Holies, which contained the Ark of the Covenant and was said to be the area upon which God’s presence dwelt. All biblical holidays centered on worship at the Temple. The Temples served as the primary location for the offering of sacrifices and were the main gathering place for Israelites.

According to the Talmud, the world was created from the foundation stone of the Temple Mount. It’s believed to be the biblical Mount Moriah, the location where Abraham fulfilled God’s test to see if he would be willing to sacrifice his son Isaac.

The Temple Mount has remained a focal point for Jewish services for thousands of years. Prayers for a return to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Temple have been uttered by Jews since the Second Temple was destroyed, according to Jewish tradition.

The Al Aqsa Mosque was constructed in about A.D. 709 to serve as a shrine near another shrine, the Dome of the Rock, which was built by an Islamic caliph. Al Aqsa was meant to mark what Muslims came to believe was the place at which Muhammad, the founder of Islam, ascended to heaven to receive revelations from Allah.

Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran. It is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible 656 times.

Islamic tradition states Muhammad took a journey in a single night on a horse from “a sacred mosque” – believed to be in Mecca in southern Saudi Arabia – to “the farthest mosque” and from a rock there ascended to heaven. The farthest mosque became associated with Jerusalem about 120 years ago.

According to research by Israeli Author Shmuel Berkovits, Islam historically disregarded Jerusalem. Berkovits points out in his new book, “How dreadful is this place!” that Muhammad was said to loathe Jerusalem and what it stood for. He wrote Muhammad made a point of eliminating pagan sites of worship and sanctifying only one place – the Kaaba in Mecca – to signify the unity of God.

As late as the 14th century, Islamic scholar Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyya, whose writings influenced the Wahhabi movement in Arabia, ruled that sacred Islamic sites are to be found only in the Arabian Peninsula and that “in Jerusalem, there is not a place one calls sacred, and the same holds true for the tombs of Hebron.”

It wasn’t until the late 19th century – incidentally when Jews started immigrating to Palestine – that some Muslim scholars began claiming Muhammad tied his horse to the Western Wall and associated Muhammad’s purported night journey with the Temple Mount

A guide to the Temple Mount by the Supreme Muslim Council in Jerusalem published in 1925 listed the Mount as Jewish and as the site of Solomon’s Temple. The Temple Institute acquired a copy of the official 1925 “Guide Book to Al-Haram Al-Sharif,” which states on page 4, “Its identity with the site of Solomon’s Temple is beyond dispute. This, too, is the spot, according to universal belief, on which ‘David built there an altar unto the Lord.'”