Stephen King Under The Dome
Under the DomeBy Stephen King
Stephen King Writes a Spellbinding Supernatural Novel "UNDER THE DOME"On an entirely normal, beautiful fall day in Chester's Mill, Maine, the town is inexplicably and suddenly sealed off from the rest of the world by an invisible force field. Planes crash into it and fall from the sky in flaming wreckage, a gardener's hand is severed as "the dome" comes down on it, people running errands in the neighboring town are divided from their families, and cars explode on impact. No one can fathom what this barrier is, where it came from, and when -- or if -- it will go away.Dale Barbara, Iraq vet and now a short-order cook, finds himself teamed with a few intrepid citizens -- town newspaper owner Julia Shumway, a physician's assistant at the hospital, a select-woman, and three brave kids. Against them stands Big Jim Rennie, a politician who will stop at nothing -- even murder -- to hold the reins of power, and his son, who is keeping a horrible secret in a dark pantry. But their main adversary is the Dome itself. Because time isn't just short. It's running out.Stephen King’s Under The DomeBook trailers are an interesting recent development in marketing. The very concept doesn’t make a whole lot of sense at first, seeing as books don’t actually have visual scenes to make a trailer out of, but done properly, they can be pretty effective tools for creating buzz around a new novel. And sometimes, they can be pretty cool. The trailer for Stephen King’s new book, Under The Dome, falls squarely into the “cool” category. The novel follows the inhabitants of a small town that is trapped in a huge, clear dome by unknown forces.Some say King’s best years are behind him; I disagree. That’s not to say I enjoy every last one of his books – hell, the man’s written so many, there’s no way they could all be great. But when he’s on, he’s one of the best writers in modern horror (and sometimes science fiction). To me, it seems that he’s at his best when he gives himself room to breathe, page-wise. The Stand is brilliant; so is It. Both are over 1000 pages. The Dark Tower series, his masterpiece, unfolds over the course of seven increasingly long books. Under The Dome will be 1088 pages long; hopefully, that means we can expect the epic storytelling and surprisingly personal character development the author, at his best, is capable of.Check out the trailer below; it’s short, but it got me kinda pumped for this book.
UNDER THE DOME BY STEPHEN KING
VISIONS OF 2012 DOOMSDAYDear Friend,Are you tired?Tired of all the misinformation out there about 2012?If you've done even one Google search on the topic you know what I'm talking about... SURVIVE 2012Where well-meaning “experts” went wrong... and why all the governments of the world ultimately decided not to tell you the truth.What is really going to happen in December of 2012... and exactly how millions will be devastated, and your world will be turned upside down... forever.How you can safeguard your life... and the lives of your family members. Because you really can survive... and spiritually thrive in the wake of this life-changing event.VISIONS OF 2012 DOOMSDAY - (1)VISIONS OF 2012 DOOMSDAY - (2)VISIONS OF 2012 DOOMSDAY - (3)VISIONS OF 2012 DOOMSDAY - (4)VISIONS OF 2012 DOOMSDAY - (5)The Underground Kingdom of Light - 1Journey Into The Resistance Movement - 2Galatic Wars - 3Liberation of the Planet Earth - 4Vision 2012 - 5It will begin suddenly, without warning. Many scandals that will disclose true backgound about how the System works will shake human masses. Disclosures about how international energetic megacompanies earn billions selling oil, preventing at the same time inventions of free energy to come to public. Disclosures about pharmaceutical trusts that earn money with "healing" diseases that are spread with viruses created in hidden laboratories. Disclosures about efficient cures for AIDS, cancer and other diseases that are known for quite some time, unkonwn to human masses. And about world media and censorship there, which is a logical consequence of a fact that few individuals own most worldly known newspaper, media and telecommunication companies. And finally disclosures about a secret world government that has most prominent politicians as its puppets and which creates profit out of wars and human suffering for millenia, a small group of beings that you work for in your jobs and voluntarily give them a significant amount of your monthly salary.When lists with names, supported with facts will be known, human masses will arise. When facts will be known about what is happening in the stock market and where the money really goes, this will create a world stock market crash and fall of the current monetary system. Riots will begin as a consequence of released emotional energy which was suppressed for so long. In the chaos of those days members of the Resistance movement will reveal themselves to humanity and give guidance and support. They will penetrate to the surface from their undergound realms and bring along technology that will help humanity to get over those critical moments. They will cure most of currently known diseases with their medicaments. With their free energy sources they will end world energy crisis and stop environmental pollution. They will bring information that will open the eyes of people. Finally people will realize that they have lived in quarantine for millenia. Money will disappear and will be replaced with exchange of goods based upon vibrational economy. The Resistance movement will assist in establishing new world government which will be chosen by humanity with its free will and that will lead humanity based on the principles of the Galactic codex. At that point the energy field of the planet will be cleared significantly. Memories of Atlantis will be returning to people and they will begin to create a New Atlantis, a new civillization of light. Buildings will be constructed in a combination of Atlantean and modern architecture which will be in harmony with nature. Many will be in a pyramidal or half spherical shape. Spiritually developed individuals will begin to gather in New age communities, so called islands of light. Everybody there will follow his vision aligned with the divine plan in deep connection with the universe. When people will release the past, everybody will experience clarity of mind, emotional aliveness and physical health. The basic cell of society in islands of light will not be a family of personalities (father, mother and children) but a family of souls (twin souls, soulmates and other members of a soul family). People will connect there energetically and telepathically with angels, guides and extraterestrials. Through islands of light a physical connection between the surface of the planet and extraterrestrial civillizations will be established. There will be teleportation chambers in islands of light through which it will be possible to travel into the Resistance movement, for some people into the Atlantean network and also towards the Pleiadian motherships. When the network of light will be strong and stable enough this will enable mass landings of Pleiadian starships. The Pleiadians will assist humanity during its transition towards the New age and with the process of acceptance of this planet into the Galactic confederation. They will anchor energy columns that will guide planet Earth throuh its transformation during its entry into the inner section of the tachyon belt.When the critical mass of consciousness will be achieved the first wave of Ascension will occur. Motherships of the Galactic confederation will hover as brilliant white clouds above the islands of light, where teleportation beams will descend and lift the volunteers into the motherships. Those volunteers will reappear on Earth shortly in Ascended state in their rainbow bodies of light. Soon afterwards another critical mass will be achieved and the second wave of Ascension will happen. Masses of Ascended masters that will return to Earth will prepare humanity for the third wave of Ascension and for the Evacuation. Great planetary cataclisms will begin then as a cleansing of the physical matter of the planet. At the moment of most intensive cataclisms a polar shift will happen and that will trigger the third wave of Ascension with final Evacuation. Linear time as we know it will end and Earth will enter a new, higher dimension. This is a moment when the Mayan calendar ends, a moment in 2012.
First of all, let me come outright and say that I voted for Obama and I made a donation to his campaign. I want to mention this up front because, after people read what I have to say, I don't want anyone to think I am a right-wing nutcase using this forum in spreading negative news about Obama.
I am an registered independent and usually vote based on the candidate - never based on a party politics. And, in the past I have voted for republican and democratic presidents alike based purely on the candidate. And even though I participate in the actual election, I have never participated in a campaign or donated for a candidate - ever. That changed with Obama - I had high hopes and felt that I must do something to make sure he wins and got involved - maybe it was because I wanted the nation to undergo a cleansing period after Bush.
Obama's strategy and tactics as far as the health care debate are concerned was an utter failure. In fact, as far as I can tell, there was no strategy to counter the partisan attack. I am absolutely amazed that this media blitzkrieg was not anticipated. For weeks on end there was no response - and I am not referring to lack of response at the townhalls, but lack of response even in the media and talk-shows. The right-wingers were all over the media spreading the same lies over and over again and there was no counter-point to these lies. The Obama team was utterly and completely unprepared.
That is frustratingly disappointing - in fact, disappointing to the extent that it made me angry. Angry in a sense that we potentially are letting this golden opportunity to get this reform done slip by us because we did not plan this right and did not anticipate this negative campaign and did not have a immediate response for it.
Even though I voted for Obama, now I am having second thoughts - because President Obama turned out to be different than the candidate Obama. When he was a candidate, his message was crisp, clear and we knew what he wanted to do. Now, he basically leaves everything to congress to figure out and stays out. He should have known those highly intelligent and well organized life-forms in congress will completely mess everything up. Where's the real change?
Example: the stimulus plan. What a mess! It has so much spending for the wrong things that it was a disaster. Look at how much money was in the stimulus plan for alternate energy? for high-speed rail? for alternate means of transportation? for scientific research? Pennies on the dollar!! Compared this to money given to other useless things. And alternate energy, alternate modes of transportation and other things I mentioned above were his campaign talking points. In fact, these were some of the things that made me vote for him. And, by letting congress figure this out and messing it all up, he completely lost an opportunity to spend on the things that he said mattered to him - things that would have made a difference!
Example: cash for clunker. Even though there were so many bright sides to this, congress in their infinite wisdom, managed to mess this up too. Instead of making it a simple program, they managed to make it so complicated that it was not clear for most people to understand the rules. And why did it have to take a dealer to fill out a 15-page form to submit for rebate when it takes less than half-page to submit an application for a Visa card?
And, one more thing - why does he have to be the one always selling anything to us? Why can't his cabinet members do this? It was unbelievable to hear the president of the United States telling Americans that if they buy the cars, their warranties will be honored. I mean, come on! I did not vote for him expecting him to sell me cars for gods sake! This kind of thing cheapens the presidents stature. I realize that the economy was in shambles when he took over and saving the auto industry may have been important. But, he should have left such things to his transportation secretary.
In fact, where are his cabinet members? I don't believe I have ever seen any of his cabinet members out there pushing his agenda other than perhaps secretary Clinton whom we see once in a while. Why aren't they on the airwaves every day forwarding his message? Does he even have a cabinet? Other than a few - Clinton, Geithner and Gates, I can't even name anyone else. I hardly anyone else out there. If he has these posts filled, why are they hiding? They should be out on the airways spreading his agenda and countering the right-wingers. After all, unfortunately, nowadays it has come down to who wins the propaganda war, isn't it?
Here's my perception so far - It appears to me that president Obama has become a spectator:
- Instead of making history, he seems to be content just watching history being made. Instead of laying out his plan and setting strict conditions on what he expects congress to do, he is content just watching congress make a mess of his agenda (eg: stimulus plan, health care reform).
- Instead of having a strategy and tactical plan to deal with the media blitzkrieg, he is content just watching others spread lies and negative campaign derailing his agenda.
- Instead of sticking to his campaign promise of making things efficient (real change, remember?), he is content just watching congress complicate the heck out of even simple things (eg: cash-for-clunkers, mortgage relief program).
In other words, instead of working hard making history, he is working hard in being too nice and letting others make history. And we all know what happens then - we may all wake up one day scratching our heads and wonder what happened?
Available @ YT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB6p5QPVhPI. Apparently, this has a view of the U.S. from 50 years ago. Pay attention to the bubbles embedded into the vid.
What do you think?
EMK
Aboriginal Jews, Native Jews, their natural rights in their historic homeland VS Arab immigrants ("Palestinians")
Their fight against the bigotry by Arabism & Islamism who won't "accept'" them
Contents
Israel - Rightful Historic Homeland of Aboriginal Jews
Canadian MP and former justice minister Irwin Cotler: For Israel, rooted in the Jewish people, as an Abrahamic people, is a prototypical First Nation or aboriginal people, just as the Jewish religion is a prototypical aboriginal religion, the first of the Abrahamic religions.
In a WORD, the Jewish people is the only people that still inhabits the same land, embraces the same religion, studies the same Torah, hearkens to the same prophets, speaks the same aboriginal language - Hebrew - and bears the same aboriginal name, Israel, as it did 3,500 years ago.
Israel, then, is the aboriginal homeland of the Jewish people across space and time. It is not just a homeland for the Jewish people, a place of refuge, asylum and protection. It is the homeland of the Jewish people, wherever and whenever it may be; and its birth certificate originates in its inception as a First Nation, and not simply, however important, in its United Nations international birth certificate.
The State of Israel, then, as a political and juridical entity, overlaps with the "aboriginal Jewish homeland"; it is, in international legal terms, a successor state to the biblical, or aboriginal, Jewish kingdoms. [1]
Historical Roots
Jews
Aboriginal Rights to Israel, Aboriginal Native Jews to Israel "Palestine"
There is an enormous body of archaeological and historical evidence demonstrating that the Jewish People -- like the Greek People or the Han Chinese People -- is among the oldest of the world's Peoples. Thus, it is well known that the Jewish People has more than 3,500 years of continuous history, with a subjective-objective national identity that, in each century, has kept a link to the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. For example, the Jewish Bible, the Christian Gospels and the Koran all specifically testify to the connection between the Jewish People and its historic homeland. Like other Peoples, the Jewish People has a right to self-determination. Though the self-determination of the Arab People is expressed via twenty-one Arab countries, Israel is the sole expression of the self-determination of the Jewish People, which of all extant Peoples, has the strongest claim to be considered aboriginal to the territory west of the Jordan River.
Thus, the Jewish People is aboriginal to Israel in the same way that, in Canada, certain First Nations are deemed aboriginal to their ancestral lands. And, it is noteworthy that the Supreme Court of Canada has decided that, where aboriginals maintain their historical connection with the land, aboriginal title can survive both sovereignty changes and influx of new populations resulting from foreign conquest.Yet, (bigotry by) Arabs, Muslims have denied that the Jews are a People within the context of the modern political and legal doctrine of the self-determination of Peoples. Keeping in mind that the Middle East has always had a significant Jewish population, including some Jews who, in each century, continued to live west of the Jordan River. Today, many of the sons and daughters of these Middle Eastern Jews are citizens of Israel, where they have been joined by Jews from many other countries. When In October 1917, the British Cabinet adopted, as a declared war aim, the creation of an entirely new country called "Palestine" to serve as "a national home for the Jewish People," it was done to help realize the Jewish People�s self-determination on its ancestral lands... so was the announcment to the world of Jewish-National-Home Palestine in the November 1917 Balfour Declaration. As the international decision to establish "a national home for the Jewish People" was the sole rationale for the 1922 creation of Jewish-National-Home Palestine which, under the aegis of the League of Nations. While deep into the 20th century, Arab leaders themselves failed to recognize the right to self-determination of a distinct Palestinian Arab People. For example, as principal Arab leader at the 1919-1920 Paris Peace Conference, Prince Feisal specifically accepted the plan to create Palestine as �a national home for the Jewish People� and his father, the Hashemite King of the Hedjaz (later part of Saudi Arabia) was party to the 1920 Sevres Treaty that explicitly stipulated that the newly-created Palestine would be "a national home for the Jewish People." [2]
One has described a "remarkable synergy" between the Australian aboriginals and the Jews: "The Jewish community is an ancient and oppressed people, as the Aborigines are; we were the indigenous people of the land of Israel who were kicked out of our land 2000 years ago." [3]
Jews - Ancient Indigenous Natives in the area
There's extensive research on The Dhimmi: (Indigenous) Jews & Christians Under Islam [4], 850,000 Jews had to flee Arab Muslim lands where they had lived for centuries - often longer than the Arabs who now claim to be its indigenous national people. [5]
JIMENA stands for: 'Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa', it is a human rights organization seeking to educate and advocate for the plight of Jewish refugees from the Middle East. Prior to 1948, approximately 850,000 Jews lived in Muslim countries of the Middle East, North Africa, and the Persian Gulf. Today, 99 percent of these ancient Jewish communities no longer exist due to Arab and Islamic government actions that directly led to their displacement. [6]
Jews are a multi-racial, multi-ethnic people. For about 50 years, the majority of the Jewish population of Israel has been Mizrahim - Jews indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa. Moreover, this community of Jews has lived in the Middle East and North Africa since time immemorial. Until the mid-twentieth century, in the 4,000-year history of the Jewish people, Mizrahim never left the region. (When Arab Muslims conquered the Middle East and North Africa, Jews were one of the few indigenous peoples that resisted conversion to Islam), [7]
Arab immigrants and their lies about being "natives"
The Arabs in the Holy Land - Aliens, not Natives! [8], The True Identity of the So-called Palestinians. The current myth is that these Arabs were long established in "Palestine", until the Jews came and "displaced" them. The fact is, that recent Arab immigration into the Land of Israel displaced the Jews. That the massive increase in Arab population was very recent is attested by the ruling of the United Nations: That any Arab who had lived in the Holy Land for two years and then left in 1948 qualifies as a "Palestinian refugee". Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by Walid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against: "Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?" "We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag". "When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out". [9], in fact, the myth of the Palestinian People serves as the justification for Arab occupation of the Land of Israel. [10]
An explanatory film came out to 'dispel Arab propaganda', on the tactics disguising the Arab immigrants as "indigenous native Palestinian" [11]
Even Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas Admits Palestinian Arabs Are Not Indigenous. From a speech given to the PLO [12]
A writer in: 'The Myth Of The Palestinian People,' Only one question never seems to be addressed: Who are the Palestinians? Who are these people who claim the Holy Land as their own? What is their history? Where did they come from? How did they arrive in the country they call Palestine? Not only pre-state Arabs lied about being indigenous. Even today, many prominent so-called Palestinians, it turns out, are foreign born. Edward Said, an Ivy League Professor of Literature and a major Palestinian propagandist, long claimed to have been raised in Jerusalem. However, in an article in the September 1999 issue of Commentary Magazine Justus Reid Weiner revealed that Said actually grew up in Cairo, Egypt, a fact which Said himself was later forced to admit. But why bother with Said? PLO chief Yasir Arafat himself, self declared 'leader of the Palestinian people', has always claimed to have been born and raised in 'Palestine'. In fact, according to his official biographer Richard Hart, as well as the BBC, Arafat was born in Cairo on August 24, 1929 and that's where he grew up. [13]
A writer in "The Real Palestinian Refugees": Jews have lived in Israel/Palestine for 4000 years and those Jewish families who have constantly lived in the country since Biblical times, the mustarabim, are the indigenous Palestinians. (There has never been a 2000 year absence).
The first Arabs came to the country in the 7th century in the wake of their conquering armies after the death of Mohammed. They've been immigrating, and emigrating, ever since, bringing with them their civil wars (in which Jews were severely persecuted by both sides) and their screwed-up environmental concepts that turned forest into desert. Other groups of peoples also immigrated to Israel/Palestine during this time, especially the Druze. (Today, if you call a Druze an Arab, you've just insulted him. This was told to me by a Druze.) Perhaps the earliest Zionist pioneers did have to fight Arab marauders and make the desert bloom, but they did not come to an empty land. Maybe it was sparsely populated, but it was not empty of Jews.
In 1920/1. The first Palestinian refugees were Jews. In the aftermath of WWI, after the Arab riots.
In 1922, in a continuing policy of appeasing the Arabs, 75% of Palestine was taken away from the Jews and the Emirate of Transjordan was created, later to become Jordan. First the British, then the Arabs, banned the entry of Jews from the area - a policy that continued until very recently. [14]
Desolated "Palestine" in the late 1800
The Land of Israel, according to dozens of visitors to the land, was, until the beginning of the last century, practically empty. Alphonse de Lamartine visited the land in 1835. [15]
On a visit to the Ottoman-controlled Holy Land in 1860, Mark Twain described it as "the prince of desolation." "The hills are barren� the valleys unsightly deserts� peopled by swarms of beggars struck with ghastly sores and malformations� Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes� only the music of angels could charm its shrubs and flowers again into life."
Other writers and artists visiting the Holy Land (chiefly from Britain and Germany) � as well as geographers, archeologists, and cartographers � were equally stunned by its utter desolation.
It was only toward the end of the 18th century, when a growing stream of Jewish immigrants rehabilitated the land � draining swamps, reclaiming deserts, and controlling the diseases (chiefly malaria) � that a decimated Arab population began increasing. The resuscitation of the land by the Jews and the economic opportunity they created brought an influx of Arab immigrants from dirt-poor neighboring Arab states to swell the number of Arabs in Palestine, so that by the turn of the century there were about 250,000 Arab Muslims and 150,00 Jews living there. 100,000 Christians and others was common colonial practice: divide and rule. In India, it enabled the British to subdue the subcontinent with few troops by pitting hostile segments of the indigenous population against each other. They employed this strategy in Palestine too. British officials, many of them avowed anti-Semites, fanned Arab resentment over broken British promises to make the Arabian chieftain, Faisal, king of Damascus and Syria, and redirected it against Jewish aspirations in Palestine. Their naming the mandate over the Holy Land "Palestine," rather than the land of Israel, was a deliberate effort to obliterate the Jewish connection to the land by calling it by its Roman name. [16]
In the early 19th century, Palestine was a backward, neglected province of the Ottoman Empire. Travelers to Palestine from the Western world left records of what they saw there. The theme throughout their reports is dismal: The land was empty, neglected, abandoned, desolate, fallen into ruins.
In Jerusalem, all reports and journals of travelers, pilgrims and government representatives during these years, repeatedly record the poverty, filth and neglect and the desolate nature of the countryside. Early photographs show lepers in rags and dilapidated buildings. Jerusalem was surrounded by marauding bands of Bedouin Arabs and had to close her gates at nightfall and reopen them at first light, a practice that was similar in Biblical times.
Some quotes from the writings of these visitors before modern times:
Nothing there [Jerusalem] to be seen but a little of the old walls which is yet remaining and all the rest is grass, moss and weeds. [English pilgrim in 1590]
The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is of a body of population. [British consul in 1857]
There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent [valley of Jezreel] -- not for 30 miles in either direction... One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings. ... For the sort of solitude to make one dreary, come to Galilee ... Nazareth is forlorn ... Jericho lies a moldering ruin ... Bethlehem and Bethany, in their poverty and humiliation... untenanted by any living creature... A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds ... a silent, mournful expanse ... a desolation ... We never saw a human being on the whole route ... Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil had almost deserted the country ... Of all the lands there are for dismal scenery Palestine must be the prince. The hills barren and dull, the valleys unsightly deserts [inhabited by] swarms of beggars with ghastly sores and malformations. Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes ... desolate and unlovely ... [Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad, 1867] [17]
Israel - result of a national Liberation of the aboriginal Jews
Israel can be seen as the result of the national liberation movement of the region's aboriginal Jews. Liberation of the aboriginal Jews (and anyone else lucky enough to find refuge within Israel's borders) from the twin fascisms of pan-Arabism and Islamism which have oppressed and even eliminated so many of the region�s aboriginal ethnic groups. Israel's aboriginal Jews were not unique in accepting outside help (and even immigration) in their liberation struggle, so were Lebanon's Maronites; Egypt's Copts, Iraq and Turkey's Kurds, and Iran's Zoroastrians. [18], as a commentator said: It is immoral to ethnically cleanse Judea of its aboriginal Jews. as It is immoral to ethnically cleanse Australia of its Australian aborigines, It is immoral to ethnically cleanse Judea of its Jewish aborigines (Jews = originally from Judea). [19]
One major difference between the Jews' return to the Land of Israel and the restitution of the title that indigenous groups have to their traditional lands in Australia and Canada is that the latter occurred within the political framework of states that have established legislative and judicial institutions and law enforcement agencies. These institutions draft the principles that define the relationships among all of their subjects, and they settle any disputes which might arise. In contrast, the Jews' return to Palestine occurred in an international context in which such legislative, judicial, and law enforcement institutions were in their embryonic stages. [20]
Adolf Hitler / Nazis hated Arabs as an inferior “race”, yet praised Islam in its ‘war like’ TOTALITARIAN ideology He saw them as a great disposable tool to be used against the Jews, the mufti fell for it.
SPLCenter.org: The Swastika and the Crescent, Although he loathed Arabs (he once described them as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped“), Hitler understood that he and the Mufti shared the same rivals, British and the Jews… http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=242
ESSAY - May 2002 By Martin A. Lee …Ahmed Huber: Neo-Nazi, Islamic convert… The roots of the Muslim Brotherhood and, in many ways, the Nazi-Muslim axis go back to the organisation’s formation in Egypt in 1928. Marking the start of modern political “Islamic fundamentalism,” the Brotherhood from the outset envisioned a time when an Islamic state would prevail in Egypt and other Arab countries.
The growth of the Muslim Brotherhood coincided with the rise of fascist movements in Europe - a parallel noted by Muhammad Sa’id al-’Ashmawy, former chief justice of Egypt’s High Criminal Court, who decried “the perversion of Islam” and “the fascistic ideology” that infuses the world view of the Brothers. Youssef Nada, current board chairman of Al Taqwa, had joined the armed branch of the Muslim Brotherhood as a young man in Egypt during World War II. Nada and several of his cohorts in the Sunni Muslim fraternity were recruited by German military intelligence. Hassan al-Banna, the Egyptian schoolteacher who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, also collaborated with spies of the Third Reich. Advocating a pan-Islamic insurgency in British-controlled Palestine, the Brotherhood proclaimed their support for the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, in the late 1930s.
The Grand Mufti, the preeminent religious figure among Palestinian Muslims, was the most notable Arab leader to seek an alliance with Nazi Germany. Although he loathed Arabs (he once described them as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped”), Hitler understood that he and the Mufti shared the same rivals - the British, the Jews and the Communists. They met in Berlin, where the Mufti lived in exile during the war. The Mufti agreed to help organise a special Muslim division of the Waffen SS. Powerful radio transmitters were put at the Mufti’s disposal so that his pro-Axis propaganda could be heard throughout the Arab world. http://www.aijac.org.au/review/2002/275/essay275.html
War aims in the second world war: the war aims of the major belligerents … - by Victor Rothwell - History - 2005 - 244 pages (Page 41) However, the Nazis were clear in their minds that the Arabs were racially inferior, and there would, therefore, be no pleasure to be had from helping them in anything except for the extermination of Jews in their region. http://books.google.com/books?id=XfgLbSc94MEC&pg=PA41
Islam, Nazism, and Totalitarianism
During an interview conducted in the late 1930s (published in 1939), Carl Jung, the Swiss psychiatrist and founder of analytical psychiatry, was asked “…had he any views on what was likely to be the next step in religious development?” Jung replied, in reference to the Nazi fervor that had gripped Germany We do not know whether Hitler is going to found a new Islam. He is already on the way; he is like Muhammad. The emotion in Germany is Islamic; warlike and Islamic. They are all drunk with wild god. That can be the historic future. Albert Speer, who was Hitler’s Minister of Armaments and War Production, wrote a contrite memoir of his World War II experiences while serving a 20-year prison sentence imposed by the Nuremberg tribunal.
Speer’s narrative includes this discussion, which captures Hitler’s racist views of Arabs on the one hand, and his effusive praise for Islam on the other:
Hitler had been much impressed by a scrap of history he had learned from a delegation of distinguished Arabs. When the Mohammedans attempted to penetrate beyond France into Central Europe during the eighth century, his visitors had told him, they had been driven back at the Battle of Tours. Had the Arabs won this battle, the world would be Mohammedan today. For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament. Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire. Hitler usually concluded this historical speculation by remarking, “You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” http://www.andrewbostom.org/content/view/61/55/
The roots of Arab Anti-Semitism - By David Greenberg - Slate Magazine Oct 31, 2001 … As he notes, anti-Semitism in Arab countries (and non-Arab Islamic states such as Iran) …. East—they were eager to make common cause with Hitler, despite Nazi belief that they, like the Jews, were inferior to Aryans. … http://www.slate.com/id/2057949/
The third Reich & the Palestine question - Francis R. Nicosia - 2000 - History - 319 pages (Page 85) Most Arabs never realized that the Nazis would consider them racially inferior as well and that Germany had no intention of undermining British authority in … http://books.google.com/books?id=xh4m-OMrhJUC&pg=PA85
The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj … Chuck Morse - 2003 - History - 188 pages (page 53) … as Hitler was known to have described the Arabs as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped,” to a lower race … http://books.google.com/books?id=HGkthBwbNg8C&pg=PA53
Despite Hitler’s personal antipathy towards Arabs, who he once described as lacquered half apes who ought to be whipped, he nevertheless was prepared to … http://www.thecst.org.uk/docs/An%20unholy%20alliance%201801%20original.doc
The Beast Reawakens: Fascism’s Resurgence from Hitler’s Spymasters …Martin A. Lee - 1999 - Political Science - 560 pages (page 122) Even though he loathed Arabs (he once described them as “lacquered half-apes who ought to be whipped”), Hitler was nonetheless the idol of the paramilitary … http://books.google.com/books?id=SX4B7pNG3W8C&pg=PA122
The US/Britain 200 Years war against Islamic pirates - terrorists
For young Somalis, piracy offers power, prosperity The Associated Press There are several known pirate groups in Somalia. One is based in the southern port town of Kismayo, which is controlled by Islamic insurgents. … http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iR9XICoYi0CQt77GJUw5lNAPpG_AD97EGS200
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Somali pirates seize American ship, crew … by Ed Morrissey Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates …one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping … So here was an early instance of the “heads I win, tails you lose” dilemma, in which the United States is faced with corrupt regimes, on the one hand, and Islamic militants, on the other—or indeed a collusion between them. … http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/08/somali-pirates-seize-american-ship-crew/
A look back at history
Britain’s 200-year jihad (and US facing them)
Britain’s 200-year jihad There are many similarities between the stateless jihad of the 1700’s and ….. The pirate ships set sail for Algeria later that day, with the captives on … http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/008320.php
America’s Earliest Terrorists
Lessons from America’s first war against Islamic terror.
December 16, 2005, 9:55 a.m. By Joshua E. London At the dawn of a new century, a newly elected United States president was forced to confront a grave threat to the nation — an escalating series of unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslim terrorists. Worse still, these Islamic partisans operated under the protection and sponsorship of rogue Arab states ruled by ruthless and cunning dictators. Sluggish in recognizing the full nature of the threat, America entered the war well after the enemy’s call to arms. Poorly planned and feebly executed, the American effort proceeded badly and at great expense — resulting in a hastily negotiated peace and an equally hasty declaration of victory. As timely and familiar as these events may seem, they occurred more than two centuries ago. The president was Thomas Jefferson, and the terrorists were the Barbary pirates. Unfortunately, many of the easy lessons to be plucked from this experience have yet to be fully learned. The Barbary states, modern-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, are collectively known to the Arab world as the Maghrib (”Land of Sunset”), denoting Islam’s territorial holdings west of Egypt. With the advance of Mohammed’s armies into the Christian Levant in the seventh century, the Mediterranean was slowly transformed into the backwater frontier of the battles between crescent and cross. Battles raged on both land and sea, and religious piracy flourished. The Maghrib served as a staging ground for Muslim piracy throughout the Mediterranean, and even parts of the Atlantic. America’s struggle with the terror of Muslim piracy from the Barbary states began soon after the 13 colonies declared their independence from Britain in 1776, and continued for roughly four decades, finally ending in 1815. Although there is much in the history of America’s wars with the Barbary pirates that is of direct relevance to the current “war on terror,” one aspect seems particularly instructive to informing our understanding of contemporary Islamic terrorists. Very simply put, the Barbary pirates were committed, militant Muslims who meant to do exactly what they said. Take, for example, the 1786 meeting in London of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain. As American ambassadors to France and Britain respectively, Jefferson and Adams met with Ambassador Adja to negotiate a peace treaty and protect the United States from the threat of Barbary piracy. These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.” Sound familiar? The candor of that Tripolitan ambassador is admirable in its way, but it certainly foreshadows the equally forthright declarations of, say, the Shiite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1980s and the Sunni Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, not to mention the many pronouncements of their various minions, admirers, and followers. Note that America’s Barbary experience took place well before colonialism entered the lands of Islam, before there were any oil interests dragging the U.S. into the fray, and long before the founding of the state of Israel. America became entangled in the Islamic world and was dragged into a war with the Barbary states simply because of the religious obligation within Islam to bring belief to those who do not share it. This is not something limited to “radical” or “fundamentalist” Muslims. Which is not to say that such obligations lead inevitably to physical conflict, at least not in principle. After all peaceful proselytizing among various religious groups continues apace throughout the world, but within the teachings of Islam, and the history of Muslims, this is a well-established militant thread. The Islamic basis for piracy in the Mediterranean was an old doctrine relating to the physical or armed jihad, or struggle. To Muslims in the heyday of Barbary piracy, there were, at least in principle, only two forces at play in the world: the Dar al-Islam, or House of Islam, and the Dar al-Harb, or House of War. The House of Islam meant Muslim governance and the unrivaled authority of the sharia, Islam’s complex system of holy law. The House of War was simply everything that fell outside of the House of Islam — that area of the globe not under Muslim authority, where the infidel ruled. For Muslims, these two houses were perpetually at war — at least until mankind should finally embrace Allah and his teachings as revealed through his prophet, Mohammed. The point of jihad is not to convert by force, but to remove the obstacles to the infidels’ conversion so that they shall either convert or become a dhimmi (a non-Muslim who accepts Islamic dominion) and pay the jizya, or poll tax. The goal is to bring all of the Dar al-Harb into the peace of the Dar al-Islam, and to eradicate unbelief. The Koran also promises rewards to those who fight in the jihad, plunder and glory in this world and the delights of paradise in the next. Although the piratical activities of Barbary genuinely degenerated over the centuries from pure considerations of the glory of jihad to less grandiose visions of booty and state revenues, it is important to remember that the religious foundations of the institution of piracy remained central. Even after it became commonplace for the pirate captains or their crew to be renegade Europeans, it was essential that these former Christians “turn Turk” and convert to Islam before they could be accorded the honor of engagement in al-jihad fil-bahr, the holy war at sea. In fact, the peoples of Barbary continued to consider the pirates as holy warriors even after the Barbary rulers began to allow non-religious commitments to command their strategic use of piracy. The changes that the religious institution of piracy underwent were natural, if pathological. Just as the concept of jihad is invoked by Muslim terrorists today to legitimize suicide bombings of noncombatants for political gain, so too al-jihad fil-bahr, the holy war at sea, served as the cornerstone of the Barbary states’ interaction with Christendom.
In times of conflict, America tends to focus on personalities over ideas or movements, trying to play the man, not the board — as if capturing or killing Osama bin Laden, for example, would instantly end the present conflict. But such thinking loses sight of the fact that ideas have consequences. If one believes that God commands something, this belief is not likely to dissipate just because the person who elucidated it has been silenced. Islam, as a faith, is as essential a feature of the terrorist threat today as it was of the Barbary piracy over two centuries ago. The Barbary pirates were not a “radical” or “fundamentalist” sect that had twisted religious doctrine for power and politics, or that came to recast aspects of their faith out of some form of insanity. They were simply a North African warrior caste involved in an armed jihad — a mainstream Muslim doctrine. This is how the Muslims understood Barbary piracy and armed jihad at the time, and, indeed, how the physical jihad has been understood since Mohammed revealed it as the prophecy of Allah. Obviously, and thankfully, not every Muslim is obligated, or even really inclined, to take up this jihad. Indeed, many Muslims are loath to personally embrace this physical struggle. But that does not mean they are all opposed to such a struggle any more than the choice of many Westerners not to join the police force or the armed services means they do not support those institutions. Whether “insurgents” are fighting in Iraq or “rebels” and “militants” are skirmishing in Chechnya or Hamas “activists” are detonating themselves in Israel, Westerners seem unwilling to bring attention to the most salient feature of all these groups: They claim to be acting in the name of Islam. It is very easy to chalk it all up to regional squabbles, economic depression, racism, or post-colonial nationalistic self-determinism. Such explanations undoubtedly enter into part of the equation — they are already part of the propaganda that clouds contemporary analysis. But as Thomas Jefferson and John Adams came to learn back in 1786, the situation becomes a lot clearer when you listen to the stated intentions and motivations of the terrorists and take them at face value. — Joshua E. London is the author of Victory in Tripoli: How America’s War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation (John Wiley & Sons, September 2005); for more about the book visit www.victoryintripoli.com. http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/london200512160955.asp
Jihad in the Days of Jefferson http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961230585&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
When the Founding Fathers Faced Islamists May 27, 2008 … birth of US Naval power and the campaign against the Barbary pirates: …. that United States did not start the war with the Jihadists. … http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/when-the-founding-fathers-faced-islamists/
Sally Rovers incident, at the height of North African Arab Muslim pirates’ crimes against Christians, mainly British
Britain’s 200-year jihad
On my travels for the past few days, I have been reading a book which tells the story of a quite astonishing part of British history of which I was previously unaware. In ‘White Gold’, Giles Milton records the appalling details — gleaned,it appears, from a wealth of historical documents including diaries and letters — of a seaborne Islamic jihad against Britain which lasted for no less than two centuries.
From the early seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, thousands of British men women and children were kidnapped by Arab corsairs and sold into slavery in Morocco where they were kept in conditions of unspeakable barbarism. The astounding thing is that these British victims were not merely seized at sea where they ran the gauntlet of such pirates in places such as the Straits of Gibraltar. They were actually abducted from Britain itself.
Corsairs from a place in Morocco called Sale — who became known in Britain as the ‘Sally Rovers’ — sailed up the Cornish coast in July 1625, for example, came ashore dressed in djellabas and wielding damascene scimitars, burst into the parish church at Mount’s Bay and dragged out 60 men women and children whom they shipped off to Morocco. Thousands more Britons were seized from their villages or their ships and dispatched to the hell-holes of the Moroccan slave pens, from where they were forced to work all hours in appalling conditions building the vast palace of the monstrous and psychopathic Sultan, Moulay Ismail, who tortured and butchered them at whim. Most of them perished, but the book records the survival of a tenacious Cornish boy Thomas Pellow, who survived 23 years of this ordeal and whose descendant, Lord Exmouth, finally ended the white slave trade when he destroyed Algiers in 1816.
The book makes clear that this assault upon the British people (and upon Europeans and Americans who were similarly seized) was a jihad. The Sally Rovers, writes Milton, were called ‘al-ghuzat’– the term once used for the soldiers who fought with the Prophet — and were hailed as religious warriors engaged in a holy war against the infidel Christians who were pressurised to convert to Islam under threat of hideous punishment. What is even more striking was the response of the British crown. For almost two centuries, it made only the most ineffectual attempts to rescue its enslaved subjects. Those who had succumbed to the torture and inhumanity of the Sultan and converted to Islam were deemed to be no longer British and therefore outside the scope of any rescue. The pleas of Pellow’s parents were simply brushed aside. Popular outrage forced successive Kings to dispatch a series of feeble emissaries to try to get the Sultan to end this vile traffic and release the slaves, all to no avail.
But this went on for virtually two centuries. For almost 200 years the British state either sat on its hands or wrung them impotently while the Islamic jihad seized, enslaved and butchered its people. And then it appears, this staggering onslaught was all but airbrushed out of our history.
Food for disquieting thought. http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001423.html
‘Pirates of Penzance’ redo? James Zumwalt Thursday, October 2, 2008 Soon after winning independence from England, the United States faced another war. Muslim pirates operating off North Africa’s Barbary Coast were seizing U.S., as well as European, ships sailing in international waters, holding them for tribute payment or plunder. In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, meeting in London with Tripoli’s Muslim ambassador to Britain, inquired as to the reason for such Arab hostility. Acknowledging their attacks were unprovoked, the Tripoli ambassador explained it was their right and duty under the Koran as faithful Muslim followers to plunder and enslave the unfaithful - with those Muslims dying in the process going to paradise. To stop the attacks, the United States initially agreed to pay the Barbary pirates tribute, equal to about 20 percent of government revenues. Only later did an indignant United States launch two wars against them, ending in victory in 1815 and no further payments. European nations, acting individually and collectively, suppressed pirate activity as well, with the French conquest of Algiers in 1830 providing the last nail in the Barbary Pirates’ coffin. Today, Muslim pirates again sail the seas off Africa’s coast. Mostly Somalis, these pirates have already attacked more than 60 ships this year in the vicinity of the Gulf of Aden - almost 5 times more than occurred all last year. Pirates gain confidence as owners prove willing to pay ransoms for the safe return of ships and crews, much like the United States first did with the Barbary Pirates. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/02/pirates-of-penzance-redo/
How do you deter an enemy who is willing to kill himself in order to kill you? You strike at something more important to him than his own life. Defining that will be easy for me. The next question is can America be as ruthless as our enemies?
The time has come to end the fruitless and unsustainable effort to search and destroy every cave in Afghanistan and bomb every campground in bordering Pakistan. It’s counterproductive anyway.
What will put the fear of America into terrorist masterminds and those who would follow their orders is simple and radical revenge. Masterminds have families: Cousins, brothers and fathers. Eliminate them. All at once, or one at a time, it works just as well. The ones who survive an initial “hunt” will go into hiding. Having some adult male relatives killed and the rest hiding out in caves will demoralize masterminds and their loved ones. You cannot work and support your women like that. You can’t make more baby masterminds that way. You cannot continue the blood line. The women and children will pressure them to stop their plotting and bombing.
People want to leave a familial legacy, and they can’t do that under those circumstances over the long term.
Should America do that? Yes. Do we have the “intestinal fortitude” and sustainable motivation? I don’t think so. But we should, and it shouldn’t take another terrorist attack to get us there.
For the last seven years the CIA has been kidnapping people from other nations and torturing them. Why not just go in there and quietly shoot them to death?
Frankly, by not killing women or children the way those terrorists routinely do, we can even claim the moral high ground.
Anti-Zionism is hate
By Judea Pearl March 22, 2009
In January, four longtime Israel bashers were invited to the University of California, Los Angeles, to analyze the human rights conditions in Gaza, and used the stage to attack the legitimacy of Zionism and its vision of a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians.
They criminalized Israel’s existence, distorted its motives and maligned its character, its birth, even its conception. At one point, the excited audience reportedly chanted “Zionism is Nazism” and worse.
Jewish leaders condemned this hate-fest as a dangerous invitation to anti-Semitic hysteria. The organizers, some of them Jewish, took refuge in “academic freedom” and the argument that anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism.
I fully support this mantra, not because it exonerates anti-Zionists from charges of anti-Semitism but because the distinction helps us focus attention on the discriminatory, immoral and more dangerous character of anti-Zionism.
Anti-Zionism rejects the very notion that Jews are a nation - a collective bonded by a common history - and, accordingly, denies Jews the right to self-determination in their historical birthplace. It seeks the dismantling of the Jewish nation-state: Israel.
Anti-Zionism earns its discriminatory character by denying the Jewish people what it grants to other historically bonded collectives (e.g., French, Spanish, Palestinians): namely, the right to nationhood, self-determination and legitimate coexistence with other indigenous claimants.
Anti-Semitism rejects Jews as equal members of the human race; anti-Zionism rejects Israel as an equal member in the family of nations.
Are Jews a nation? Some philosophers would argue Jews are a nation first and religion second. Indeed, the narrative of Exodus and the vision of the impending journey to the land of Canaan were etched in the minds of the Jewish people before they received the Torah at Mount Sinai. But philosophy aside, the unshaken conviction in their eventual repatriation to the birthplace of their history has been the engine behind Jewish endurance and hopes throughout their turbulent journey that started with the Roman expulsion in A.D. 70.
More important, shared history, not religion, is today the primary uniting force behind the secular, multiethnic society of Israel. The majority of its members do not practice religious laws and do not believe in divine supervision or the afterlife. The same applies to American Jewry, which is likewise largely secular. Identification with a common historical ethos, culminating in the re-establishment of the state of Israel, is the central bond of Jewish collectivity in America.
There are, of course, Jews who are non-Zionists and even anti-Zionists. There are also Jews who find it difficult to defend their identity against the growing viciousness of anti-Israel propaganda.
But these are marginal minorities at best; the vital tissues of Jewish identity today feed on Jewish history and its natural derivatives - the state of Israel, its struggle for survival, its cultural and scientific achievements and its relentless drive for peace.
Given this understanding of Jewish nationhood, anti-Zionism is in many ways more dangerous than anti-Semitism.
First, anti-Zionism targets the most vulnerable part of the Jewish people, namely, the Jewish population of Israel, whose physical safety and personal dignity depend crucially on maintaining Israel’s sovereignty. Put bluntly, the anti-Zionist plan to do away with Israel condemns 5.5 million human beings, mostly refugees or children of refugees, to eternal defenselessness in a region where genocidal designs are not uncommon.
Second, modern society has developed antibodies against anti-Semitism but not against anti-Zionism. Today, anti-Semitic stereotypes evoke revulsion in most people of conscience, while anti-Zionist rhetoric has become a mark of academic sophistication and social acceptance in certain extreme yet vocal circles of U.S. academia and media elite. Anti-Zionism disguises itself in the cloak of political debate, exempt from sensitivities and rules of civility that govern inter-religious discourse, to attack the most cherished symbol of Jewish identity.
Finally, anti-Zionist rhetoric is a stab in the back to the Israeli peace camp, which overwhelmingly stands for a two-state solution. It also gives credence to enemies of coexistence who claim that the eventual elimination of Israel is the hidden agenda of every Palestinian.
It is anti-Zionism, then, not anti-Semitism, that poses a more dangerous threat to lives, historical justice and the prospects of peace in the Middle East.
Judea Pearl is a professor at UCLA and the president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation. This article originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.israel22mar22,0,72685.story
____________________________________________________________________________________
Terrorists - justifier Rashid Khalidi has a "new" book - yet he's the same old "average Arab racist"
Rashid Khalidi (on c-span 2, books) (Author: 'Sowing Crisis') wants us to believe that Islamic republic of Iran is "not" linked to the terror organizations: Hamas, Hezbollah and that these groups have "legitimate" concerns.
Desperate as he is to act as if he's on a 'research' row and making a show of someone who's really "looking at the region from a broader angle", he did talk at first quite smoothly, dancing around and mentioning "other" problems we the USA have (supposedly) created in the region, like Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran (no, he didn't mention Carter's role in indirectly overthrowing the Shah, that led to the current Islamofascistic totalitarianism), you almost thought that Rashid might really be an academic, in the real sense of the word.
But as an average Arab Muslim "academic" he can never escape his burning Arab-racism against the Jews, though polishing his way to the maximum, he had to come to his essential venomous point, all in all, his punch line is really, the same old hateful cliche theme, "It's all Israel's fault", especially towards the end, when he was asked some questions, you could see how he was "lit" as if by a switch that turns on the Arab "moderates" hatred flames - they can never seem to resist, and fall into it each and every time.To his credit, most Arab propagandists are less patient... you don't have to wait even that long to see their outbursts.It was a small room, filled by either Arabs, or the gullible, one Arab "American" journalist is even a brazen open Jihadists-Hamas-Hezbollah supporter, none has asked about his propaganda statement that Iran fears Israel's nukes - as a "reason" for why they might be pursuing nuclear weapons, no one has asked the obvious: Did (democratic) Israel ever threaten to wipe out (oppressive) Iran like the Islamic fascist genocidal Republic did? or did Israel ever attack Iran like Iran attacked Israel via Hezbullah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad?
Never mind his Pro-Jihad statement defending Hamas, Hezbollah, portraying them as "political" movements with "concerns", and no one was refuting him - pointing to the true nature of these Jihadists that openly declare their real goal - to erase Israel.If you were to turn in towards the end, all you could hear is repeated word "occupation", more than a few times... (as you know), all crimes under the sun are all washed by this excuse, used by the children of Arab immigrants, (that have invaded the land of Israel - "Palestine," since the 1800's), and is being heard by him, as by any Arab "journalist" like a spiral.
_______________________
Related:Khalidi's New Book and Old Story http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2009/03/khalidis-new-book-and-old-story.html
Solomonia Archive: Columbia Watch: Rashid Khalidi On the other hand, this is Rashid Khalidi, and he does represent Columbia ... .http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archives/009032.shtml
Rashid Khalidi's Appointment at Columbia University...http://www.danielpipes.org/1234/rashid-khalidis-appointment-at-columbia-university
Jan 20, 2009 ... Hamas's Academic Cheerleaders [incl. Hamid Dabashi, Rashid Khalidi, Fawaz Gerges, Joseph Massad, Muqtedar Khan, Mark LeVine, et al.http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/6708
Camera-Ready Victims [incl. Rashid Khalidi]: Hamas practices human sacrifice; the world shrugs. - Campus Watch.http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/6622
All Hail the Mighty State: Texas Independence Day
173 years ago, George C. Childress hurriedly composed a document at Washington-on-the-Brazos while only 150 miles away, the Alamo was under a brutal and ultimately fatal attack by the Mexican army. The document, which was written overnight at a hastily formed convention of Texas leaders, accused the Mexican goverment of ceasing to protect the lives, liberty, and property of the people of Texas. It became the Texas Declaration of Independence.
…the people of Texas do now constitute a free, Sovereign, and independent republic, and are fully invested with all the rights and attributes which properly belong to independent nations; and, conscious of the rectitude of our intentions, we fearlessly and confidently commit the issue to the decision of the Supreme arbiter of the destinies of nations.
And with those words, the people of the Republic of Texas declared independence from Mexico on this day, March 2, 1836.
The Texas War of Independence had begun half a year earlier, on October 5, 1835, with the defeat of the Mexican army at the Battle of Gonzales by armed Texians who refused to surrender a cannon — the famous “Come and Take It” cannon — to the Mexican government, as it was their only means of protection against Indian attacks on the settlement.
General Antonio López de Santa Anna, the recently-elected president of Mexico, had just the year before abolished the Constitution of 1824 — which very loosely governed Mexican territories, including Texas — and enacted a harsh, anti-federalist constitution in its place. The new constitution took away liberties to which most Texian settlers had become accustomed, required that they convert to Catholicism, tithe 10% of their earnings to the Roman Catholic church and created the state of Coahuila y Tejas out of the former territory, with its new capital hundreds of miles away from the former capital of San Antonio. Texian settlers were furious.
After winning the Battle of Gonzales, local leader Stephen F. Austin began to round up volunteers to form a Texian Army, much to the fury of General Santa Anna. They saw their first great victory at the Siege of Bexar on December 11, 1835, defeating the Mexican army and General Santa Anna’s own brother-in-law, General Martin Perfecto de Cos, despite being outnumbered two to one and having very little ammunition or training.
The War of Indpendence reached a fever pitch at the infamous Battle of the Alamo, where General Santa Anna himself led an offensive on the Texian army members who were garrisoned at the Alamo, a former mission in San Antonio that was being used as a military headquarters. Between February 23 and March 6, 1836, the small number of Texians inside fortified the Alamo and were able to hold off the waves of Mexican troops. Ultimately outnumbered by twelve to one, the Texians were finally slaughtered — including the famous Davy Crockett, William B. Travis, James Fannin and Jim Bowie — and only a handful of survivors were allowed to leave the destroyed mission. Susanna Dickinson was spared by General Santa Anna so that she could spread the word of the defeat to her fellow Texians.
The defeat didn’t have its intended effect, as the defiant cry “Remember the Alamo!” was used to rally the Texian army during what would be the final battle of the Texas Revolution: the Battle of San Jacinto. The revolution came to an end here in Houston in a short, vicious battle. Although lasting only 18 minutes, over 600 Mexican troops were killed by an army of 900 Texians and two cannons. General Santa Anna escaped from the lost battle that day, April 21, 1836, and formally surrendered after being hunted down by a search party (who recognized the president in part due to the fancy silk underwear he was wearing).
A month later, the Treaty of Velasco was signed by General Santa Anna and David G. Burnet (the interim president of the Republic of Texas, prior to Sam Houston taking the reins) at what is now Surfside Beach. The treaty formally ended the Texas Revolution and recognized the Republic of Texas as a sovereign nation. The Republic existed as an independent nation for ten years before being annexed by the United States as the 28th state in the union.
And while it’s not entirely true that Texas retains the right to split into five separate states at any time (really, any state can split if it wants to) and it’s not at all true that Texas retains the right to secede from the United States at any time, one important thing is true (aside from the fact that the federal government has no control over our land or oil reserves; only our state goverment does!): Texans are strong, proud people who fight for what they believe in.
Happy Texas Indepdence Day, y’all!
*******
http://houstonist.com/2009/03/02/all_hail_the_mighty_state_texas_ind.php
By Katharine Shilcutt Gleave in Miscellaneous on March 2, 2009 10:00 AM
We need to give credit where credit is deserved: NAME this economic crisis after the man most responsible for it's creation.
$10 trillion deficit is what we had at the end of the Bush administration. In eight years, Bush more than DOUBLED all the indebtedness America had accrued in more than 200 years.
This is more than a talking point, this is a necessary reminder that should be made every day, so that the notoriously SHORT memories of Americans shall be stimulated on a regular basis.
In speaking with people about the president’s Economic Recovery Plan, a common question from both supporters and detractors is: “Has the government ever succeeded in something like this?” As a person with degrees in both Economics and History I can state confidently that there have been several times in recent history where something like the current plan has succeeded in reversing our country’s economic fortunes. Perhaps the one example that best illustrates the point is the post World War II example of the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, or GI Bill.
As World War II was drawing to a close President Roosevelt and many of our nation’s leaders faced a daunting challenge: what will happen when more than 15 million soldiers, sailors, and airmen get laid off from their jobs at a time when demand for the industrial goods produced by war time industry collapses? The country had faced a similar crisis after World War I, and lack of action had led to the veterans’ “Bonus March” of 1932, and contributed to the depth of the Great Depression. Social upheaval and economic collapse were a very realistic fear!
Harry W Colmery, a former Republican National Committee chairman, was one of the earliest proponents of a government program to mitigate the effects of the war’s end on the economy. Warren Atherton of the American Legion greatly influenced the content of the bill, and Arizona Democratic Senator Ernest W McFarland guided the legislation through Congress. So, the bill had initial support by the minority party, was greatly influenced by a “special interest group,” and was championed by the majority party! The Economic Recovery Plan also enjoyed initial support from Republicans, but largely managed to escape special interest input because the speed in which it was passed, and ended up having to be passed by the Democrats with little support from the minority party.
The main parts of the bill were provisions for college or vocational training, and one year of unemployment benefits for returning service men. So, it invested in our future by creating a more educated and skilled work force while deferring many people’s entry into the work force, and provided immediate help to the unemployed. Subsequent legislation, after the war including the Employment Act of 1946, and various programs aimed at making home ownership a practical goal for most families also had a stimulative economic effect. The Marshall Plan, with its buy American provisions did as much to bolster our economy as it did to rebuild Europe.
While our challenges after World War II were brought on by different circumstances, they were similar to the problems we face today: industry that needs to be retooled, a collapse of world wide demand caused by the inability of consumers to pay, a surge of suddenly unemployed workers, all of which is happening after years of deficit spending by the federal government. The actions that the United States took spurred demand across our economy by directing government spending into programs that created long lasting value for our nation. The Economic Recovery Plan has exactly the same goal.
Our country’s reaction to the economic challenge that it faced after World War II was hugely successful and can largely be credited with creating the middle class that became, and remains, the main economic driver in the U.S. economy. Our country eventually had to stop deficit spending, and bring forth a balanced budget when the economy got to a stable point, but it can be said that government fiscal (spending) policy has a long and mostly successful history as a tool for dealing with economic hardship. President Obama’s Economic Recovery Plan, like the GI Bill, is aimed at solving a problem BEFORE it gets out of hand. History says that it can work, and it is worthy of our enthusiastic support.
I was asked recently why I refer to myself as an “Obamacrat” when I’m a registered Democrat. And it’s a very good question. From 2000 to 2007, I was a registered independent. During that period, I continued voting for Democrats because I liked their agenda and issues, but I scoffed at the notion of belonging to a party. After all, “issue identification” has always been more important to me than “party affiliation”.But President Obama really inspired me to change my party affiliation…and ultimately, to believe again. My belief in the concept of the politics of hope has always been strong, but now it's bigger than the boundaries of this planet we inhabit. It was just a matter of time before I knew the word Obamacrat fully applied to me. But it's more than a word, it's a bonafide movement.Allow me to explain.To be an Obamacrat is to acknowledge (not dismiss) the color-specific differences that make us unique, while also embracing the color-blind commonalities that bring us together. If you see it this way, then you’re happy that President Obama has assembled a rich, cosmopolitan group of smart people that will advance, improve, and transform lives while "visually reflecting" the diversity of America. In a country of shifting demographics, this is necessary. In fact, Obamacrats will be cheering loudly when President Obama names a Latino and an Asian American to The Supreme Court.To be an Obamacrat is recognize that nothing, but nothing, trumps grass roots organizing. President Obama beat Hillary Clinton during the Democratic Primary season last year because of his simple community organizing philosophy: city-by-city; block-by-block; person-by-person. But he became the most popular person in the world when he grew his profile using the tools of The New Media: the MySpacing-YouTubing-Facebooking-texting-Twittering component. Obamacrats see this as the smartest way to market your message for a mass audience. And we appreciate how Barack Obama continues to use New Media tools to promote his presidential message.Obamacrats crave diplomacy, you know, where our country talks to both its friends (like Great Britain and Israel) and its enemies (like North Korea and Iran). In a world that is more connected and inter-dependent than ever before, nations working together can reduce, if not obliterate, the child sex trade; female inequality; global warming; the AIDS epidemic; famine; and never-ending war.Furthermore, Obamacrats also want a president who can bridge the cultural divide in this country, you know, someone with both BLUE STATE credentials and RED STATE credibility. Indeed, regardless of who voted for him on November 4th, President Obama now represents the evangelical farmer in Montana and the supply-side economist in Mississippi (who probably didn’t support him) as well as the small business owner in California and the union worker in Connecticut (who probably did).To be an Obamacrat is to believe you can build something as majestic as The Great Pyramids or The Great Wall of China; to believe you can be as historic and life-affirming as P.B.S. Pinchback or Shirley Chisholm; or to believe that regardless of your cultural name (Gupta, Nguyen, Garcia, Omar or, Obama) you can be President of the United States. You know there are limits, but your strong, overpowering belief in the possibilities pushes you, and drives you.Labeling myself an Obamacrat is a profoundly impressive honor that I take very seriously. I love the fact that President Obama is not only a great communicator, but also an intellectual stud. The Obama Family living in The White House, a building built by African-American slaves, is compelling. Truly earth shattering. But, even more compelling is the fact that slaves also dug foundations, hauled limestone, baked bricks, and cleared timber for The Capitol, where Obama was inaugurated, and for the massive area known as The National Mall, where 2 million people were packed in to witness his swearing in.Like President Obama, we walk in the spirit of people who championed our rights, who spoke truth to power, and, who even envisioned this great moment in history. Let us all make the most of it.To be an Obamacrat? Man, right now, nothing even compares to the feeling.
2morrowknight is an internet strategist and community organizer who blogs at 2morrowknight.blogspot.com, and is author of a forthcoming children's book. You can follow him at Twitter.com/2morrowknight and friend him at Myspace.com/2morrowknight.
Senator Dodd went rogue and inserted some crazy stuff into the new law, so the President will need to be creative. Perhaps we are looking for HEROES to run our troubled banks. A lot of wealthy patriots have made great financial sacrifices to serve in the Obama Administration. Like-minded people who don’t want to go through the vetting process and insane pubic humiliation of being outed on every little tax related or other embarrassment can now serve their country without becoming federal employees but while still consenting to be paid wages not all that far above that.
I see nothing different Obama has said or done since 2004 and today -- perhaps Gregg's understanding of it morphed overnight between the time he was begging for the job and yesterday, when it came time to vote on the stimulus plan. Gregg seems to claim otherwise.
Obama should have known Gregg either hasn't the courage of his convictions or , far more likely, hasn't got any deeply held beliefs other than politics. We demand omniscience! How DARE the President not realize a man like Gregg would say anything to further his own personal ambitions?
There's something wrong with a vetting process that cannot discern that a politically savvy adult who somehow got himself repeatedly elected to the US Senate would claim to have turned his back on Petty Partisan Politics but actually lack the moral fortitude to stand by his decision.
