3/21/2008
the Obama campaign is consistent
Consistent on hating.
Here’s a collection.
Obama’s campaign supports Hamas terrorists. First, we have this:
Sen. Barack Obama’s Chicago church reprinted a manifesto by Hamas that defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist and compared the terror group’s official charter — which calls for the murder of Jews — to America’s Declaration of Independence.
Obama’s church reprinting an America-hating diatribe by Hamas. That by itself doesn’t reflect poorly on Obama, but this does:
The revelation follows a recent WND article quoting Israeli security officials who expressed “concern” about Robert Malley, an adviser to Obama who has advocated negotiations with Hamas and providing international assistance to the terrorist group.
We should ‘try to understand them’….is what the libs say.
In his July 22, 2007, church newsletter, Wright reprinted an article by Mousa Abu Marzook, identified in the publication as a “deputy of the political bureau of Hamas.” A photo image of the piece was captured and posted today by the business blog BizzyBlog, which first brought attention to it. The Hamas article was first published by the Los Angeles Times, garnering the newspaper much criticism.
I’m certain that people recall the article I keep citing over at Frontpage Magazine called “Radical Muslims for Obama”...
And the fact that the New Black Panthers are also on Obama’s website.
Oops, it was removed! Looks like they were caught again with their pants down….but that doesn’t change the fact that the NBPP supports him:
The removal by the Barack Obama campaign from its official website of an endorsement from the black supremacist New Black Panther Party, or NBPP, was decided upon for “understandable political reasons,” according to the party’s national chairman.
“It’s the game of politics,” the NBPP’s Malik Zulu Shabazz told WND. “The Obama camp’s move to remove our blog doesn’t mean much because I understand politics. We still completely support Obama as the best candidate.”
Shabbaz, who has given scores of speeches condemning “white men” and Jews, said today Obama “is the best guy to bring the kinds of racial changes supported by our community at the New Black Panthers.”
That’s rather frightening to me…because these are the folks that say we should kill all white people…including little babies. But that’s no different than the extreme racism of Nelson Mandella, which calls out to kill the whites.
Obama’s campaign stands for what his supporters stand for, and by extension, birds of a feather flock together. What is surprising is that they’re so brazen about it…and then quickly do some editing of the website to hide it.
I think white liberals are going to have a hard time excusing all of this, because the more that comes out about Obama’s radical muslim connections, and his connection with Africa and white hating communists there…like his cousin Odinga…the more it’s going to be difficult to excuse. Men like meathead don’t realize what they’re doing when they support black cop killers like Mumia, it seems to me…they are signing their own death warrants. Just as is the case with infidels like Tom Fox…just because you side with the enemy doesn’t mean they’ll spare you.
Obama has been squiggling with discomfort over his recent statements about his grandmother being afraid of black men walking past her on the street.
These are divisive feelings about race over which Charlie Manson would be proud.
The war would be triggered by “some black people coming out of the ghetto and doing atrocious crimes… killings… writing things in blood.” However, by summer 1969, Manson was heard to say that blacks did not know how to start its role in this war, so he would have to show them.
If leftists have their way, we will have an ‘open society’ where nuts like Manson are running free.
But it all comes together and gives us a clear perspective…Obama’s campaign is entirely consistent with the race baiting of the KKK, which was a radical wing of the democratic party…only upside down. Instead he is glorified by the Black Panthers, is congratulated by Louis Farrakhan, and his spiritual mentor is Jeremiah Wright, whose church supports Hamas. This isn’t all that different from Clinton, who declared himself ‘the first black president’…Hillary, after all, worked for the New Haven 9 when she was at Yale, and was mentored by Tommy the commie.
Never fear, though, in the Audacity of Hope, Obama says when things turn tough, he will side with the muslims.
March 21st, 2008 at 4:06 pm
But he wants to be a uniter, not a divider. He is doing well in people against him!
March 21st, 2008 at 9:22 pm
He still has that old marxist ‘us versus them’ philosophy….blacks are ‘oppressed’ and the white man is the oppressor.
Kids are learning this marxist BS in school now.
It’s interesting…Obama’s relatives were slave owners - on his mother’s side - and they were all democrats.
March 23rd, 2008 at 10:08 pm
err… the video of the great freedom fighter Nelson Mandela is subtitled incorrectly.
The song does not support killing whites, but rather Boers. Just gogled it
source: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060812032521AA2i1aq
America propoganda at its best it seems - another lie for another war.
March 24th, 2008 at 6:16 am
Right, leftists will make any excuse for Africans to hate whites…
Mandela is a “freedom fighter” along the same lines as Osama Bin Laden.
In fact, Mandela was imprisoned for planting bombs, just like the wahhabis he supports.
—We members of Umkhonto are prepared to kill all the Boers.
—Get on the roof and tell them that when I hit the Boer, my mother becomes happy.
—Whites and Boers are troubling our parents at home: we are going to hit them with our Ak-47’s and bazookas.
Though today he maintains that the songs were just a sort of “campfire songs”, these statements by Peter Mokaba made during a meeting with black students, published in The Johannesburg Star on the 25th of April in 1993, tell a different story:
—They are complaining that in our songs, in our chants, we have been saying “Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer.” I repeat: “Kill the Boer, the Farmer, Kill the Boer, the Farmer. Shoot to kill—nyamazano” (Eng. the prey).
—Whether they like it or not, this is our chant. This is our song. This is our tradition. This is our culture, whether they like it or not …
Songs encouraging the killing of South Africa’s white farmers, of which almost 2000 have been murdered by blacks since the ANC took over power in 1994, are still common in South Africa. Even Thabo Mkebi has been witnessed when taking part in these dances and songs.
During the trial in early 2006 against South Africa’s then vice president Jacob Zuma, who was charged with rape but acquitted, crowds of blacks were singing Zuma’s personal favourite song “My Machine Gun” outside the courthouse.
Nelson Mandela Singing about Killing Whites
March 24th, 2008 at 10:49 am
When you begin to compare the great Nelson Mandela with the pathetic Osama Bin Laden (or even Bush if u want), it shows the limited understanding you have of South Africa and Nelson Mandela.
South Africa was under an apertheid government in which 98% of SOuth Africa’s wealth was controlled by whites. The government was extremely racist and constantly segregated communities based on race. Blacks did not have the privalages to the same medical care, education or dreams as whites did.
Nelson Mandela militia was a resistance movement through guns because diplomacy had failed. He famously stated:
After over 350 years of blacks being living as foriegners in their own country, Nelson Mandela freed South Africa from apertheid rule. Of course, things are not perfect, but only an ignorant person wh opposes freedoms would say what Nelson Mandela did was wrong.
March 24th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Communists notoriously talk out of both sides of their mouths….this guy is no different…and Obama is no different.
He’s waffling, waivering and reluctant to talk about what he really stands for…but the real story is apparent when you look for the clues.
Sorry you don’t like it, lefty, but this is your last comment here.
March 24th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
lolll…. being anti-war and pro-peace doe not make me a communist. No-one asked what I stood for, so I have no reason to say it.
Sad to see that upsets you so much. What is worse is hearing 4000 innocent Americans sent to their graves on a war that, despite being lied to, you support.
Peace!
March 24th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and waddles like a duck, it’s a duck…no matter how it identifies itself.
You sound just like Iraq Veterans Against the WAR, United for Peace and Justice, and International ANSWER - not to mention members of Code Pink. All of them are marxists, leninists and maoists. Code Pink even gave $ and supplies to your darling ‘freedom fighters’ because they use that same verbiage when they talk about Al Q and Taliban terrorist scum.
Not to mention - you also sound like those nuts at the virulently anti-American and pro-Communist French think tank Reseau Voltaire.
Be careful of the lines you borrow…they identify you, regardless as to whether you’re bright enough to make the correlations between the ’slogans’ you use, and the groups that coined the phrases.
March 24th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
I do not read or listen to the works of any of the groups you mentioned. I do not support Maxism, Leninism or maoism.
I abhor communism and always will.
Being against America’s wars around the world does not make me a communist. Nor does being for peace make me a communist. It just so happens that I have a lot of stick with American foriegn policy - and so does the rest of the world.
Surely, we are not all commies? or are we?
March 25th, 2008 at 4:24 am
It doesn’t matter.
Your words are interchangeable with theirs. So ultimately, in your blindness (or stupidity), you’re helping them out.
Have a great day.
April 3rd, 2008 at 2:40 pm
loll @:
Like, we cannot say the same for the terrorists?
-America is fighting for peace in Iraq.
-The terrorists are fighting for peace in Iraq.
See the difference? All words are interchangeable.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:55 pm
America and Iraqis and coalition forces are fighting for freedom from Islamic terrorism….so their relatives don’t get their heads hacked off.
The terrorists, on the other hand, are fighting for Islamofascism and tyranny of the Saddam Hussein variety - only under sharia law…recently they sent fingers of American contractors who were guarding a supply convoy to officials in Iraq. The bodies were recovered, but I’d like the gory details about what these agents of the ‘religion of peace’ perpetrated against our men, and what their last hours were like.
There is a vast difference both in what they’re fighting for, and their approach.
If you can bear it, read Michael Yon’s “Bless the beasts and the children” and look closely at the pictures of Iraqi farm families - women and children - who were brutally murdered along with their livestock and tell me again that Al Qaeda is fighting for ‘freedom’. Yon painstakingly documented with photos the unearthing of the Iraqis rotting corpses.
What these people do is beyond the imagination. And to prop them up as equal to us in terms of compassion –is to deny how monstrous and unconscienable they are.
Just think about Margaret Hassan, the wife of an Iraqi who’d been working for 25 years in a humanitarian capacity. She was murdered in the most horrific way…and her corpse was found with her limbs cut off, disemboweled.
April 3rd, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Firstly, the “artists impression” displayed regarding the Palestine and Israel situation is inappropriate and simply POV bashing. We are discussion America in Iraq, not the Palestinian/Israeli situation. I can provide similar images but REAL, from the other side.
But on that subject, look at the figures. It is a shame that Israel has massacred SEVEN TIMES MORE Palestinian children than the Palestinian forces have massacred Israeli children. (http://www.rememberthesechildren.org)
Also a nice dialogue between two people both studying in the field of English Literature from the two sides can be seen on the BBC @ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/7316574.stm.
Drawing attention to the Palestinian woman who states:
You mention about America fighting for freedom. But let me tell you something. I am British and I don’t like Blair or Brown (esp. his incompotence lately). But if tommorrow the French crossed the English channel, or the Germans, or even the Americans from over the pond, and came to “liberate” (or whatever name they choose) Britain from our leader, I would resist. I will fight for queen and country, and I ain’t even patriotic and so would many of my fellow countrymen.
With Iraq, it is complicated of course, and the innocent Iraqis mustn’t kill the innocent Coalition forces or vice versa. But I understand their hate because no-one loves occupation by foriegners (not even Americans by the British centuries back), and therefore only natural they resist.
You say the terrorists are fighting under the banner of islamofacism. Why can they not be fighting under the banner of nationalism? Religion is simply a tool to a serve as a common tool between their people. The same is for the Irish situation, between Catholics and Protestants. The fighting of the Irish was more nationalism than to do with religion and the Iraq and certainly Palestine situations are no different.
I see the pictures you showed. And of course it is disgusting. But I can display the same from American soldiers, for instance incidents like in Abu Ghraib prison. Can you then truly say that your country is fighting for freedom and truly also say that their people are not, when you are both guilty of the same crimes?
You remark: “And to prop them up as equal to us in terms of compassion”.
When you look at the actions of what your country has done over the past centuries, and compare it with theirs, you rate far less as equals than them, and believe me, they are shameful, which would put America worse than shameful.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
You’d just as well quote Naom Chomsky the way Bin Laden does, LOL…it would take less room but make the same point.
As I said. You’re on the same side. It’s also telling that you would put your terrorist supporting, America-hating comments on an Obama thread!!!
Women’s rights, women’s voting was not a good thing?
Getting rid of slavery was not a good thing? (remember, that was republicans who were moving slaves to the North away from slave-owning democrats, and it was republicans who passed the civil rights amendment)
Getting rid of Hitler was not a good thing? We shouldn’t be happy that America is not speaking german today?
Fighting the communists of North Vietnam was not a good thing?
Helping the starving children of Africa is not a good thing?
Getting rid of Saddam was not a good thing?
The democrats have a lot to apologize for, I would agree. Why people keep voting for them is a mystery.
As I said, the Obama campaign an its supporters are at the very least - consistent with the practices of the democratic party.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:45 pm
How dare you say I support the terrorists. They are foul. I gave no praise for the terrroists. But I also gave no praise for America’s activities, which I believe is the most concern for you and as such, you falsely accuse me of something I did not state.
Women rights was a good thing, albeit more of an international movement.
Thanks to WW2, after which women began to be treated “almost” as equals.
But that didn’t end discrimination of races in America and certain laws e.g. prohibitig inter-racial marriages.
The Americans also supported the Nazi party economically (as i’ve already discussed in the other thread).
It was more thanks to us Brits tho. Britain gave up her empire to save Europe. The Germans would never had crossed the English channel because we had the best Navy in the world, and still do.
The Americans simply wanted a piece of our empire. And the war was what got America out of the recession. So in fact, the Allies in Europe were paying both in blood and in money to rid Hitler and Nazi Germany from Europe. America on the other hand was profiting from it.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:00 pm
and btw: regarding democrats and repulicans, I am not an American, so really I don’t care about the affiliation. I judge America by her foriegn and internal policies, and couldn’t careless about the party that enacts policies.
Most likely, had the democrats/republics been in office when the republics/democrats were, they would’ve done the same.
Like Iraq war in UK, both Labour and Conservatives voted for the war. Now they’re at each others throats because of the war. Pointless if u ask me. They are as bad as each other.
April 3rd, 2008 at 9:05 pm
vbKing, your country is being taken over from within by muslims anyway….so you’re gonna have to fight someon in the streets of london, but it won’t be americans, french or germans, it will be british born muslim adherents.
On to south africa.
Mandela did such a wonderful job getting rid of apartheid. SA has 50% of the people below the poverty line with around 25% unemployment. Great nation there. All mandela did was give the world a chance to see that given free reign to run their own countries blacks just can’t seem to get it together. Show me one country where the majority is black and the government is a black majority and I’ll wager they can’t get it together and have an unstable, fairly corrupt government that fails in the long term to reach any benchmark of success that rivals the west.
April 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am
“The song does not support killing whites, but rather Boers. Just gogled it
vbKing: I am trying to understand what point you were failing to make here. From what I have read and seen about Boers, they are not a separate race and they are most certainly not Black… so why are they “not white people”???
From Wiki on the Origin of Boers:
[edit] Origin
The Trekboere, as they were originally known, are descended mainly from Dutch Calvinist, Flemish and Frisian Calvinist as well as French Huguenot, and German Protestant origins dating from the 1650s and into the 1700s. Minor numbers of Scandinavians, Portuguese, Italian, Spanish, Polish, Scots, English, Irish and Welsh people were absorbed, as well as some descendants from early unions with slaves of mainly Indian and Malay descent and local Khoi people.
Forgive me if I’m confused, but I have been of the impression overwhelmingly, Boers are light skinned.
April 4th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Thanks, MOM, that’s exactly the point!
April 4th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Muslims are something like 2% of our population. I wouldn’t say that is taking over.
And plus, we needed immigrants for our nation to survive after WW2. Heck, we still need the Poles to pick up our greens :).
And like any other nation we ruled, after we left, they still loved us.. We bombed the **** out of the Irish, yet they kept flooding our streets. Scots hate us, but still wanna live us. It’s a crazy world.
Whether prosperous or not, they had their freedom. And I am sure when the illegitamate sons of Britain (the sons we did not want), “b@stards” if u want the correct term(i.e. the Americans) got their freedom from us, you didn’t care about the cost.
And plus, was poverty less after apertheid or during it? Genuine question, I am not sure the answer.
I asked the same question myself several times. What I learnt is that any comparison we make, for it to be fair must be before “modern” slavery in Africa (ie. by Europeans) and also before slavery of Africa by Arabs.
The best answer I can give is Ancient Egypt. But then, there is the question of whether they were black. On some of their hieroglyphics, black people are visible. But Cleopatra was most likely NOT black, and her husband DEFINELTLY NOT black. Tutukhamu maybe was black.
So conclude: maybe your right, blacks in power as a government or even an empire through the whole of history were most likely never match other civilizations.
But lets not be racist here.
And are we to deprive them of their own homeland because of this reason?
But in terms of other races, i.e. Chinese, Japanese, Indians, Iranians/Persians, Arabs, etc etc i.e. most of the old world (with exception of “black” africa), West are likely to be equals with these races but certainly NOT better or superior.
The West is a relative new race derived from Iran then Persia (aryans) that made their way to Europe. MidEast is where the first “civilization” began (note: first civilization, not people)
Now onto MOMs statement:
The song used in the video is derived from an old folk song. It was created when the Boers invaded their country. It is no different to chants done by the Irish (.e.g IRA) when they were ruled by us Brits. You can look up chants by IRA on youtube too.
I will quote one here for you:
Like I said before, I am British, yet I believed in the indepedance of Ireland, and the above chant was a result of our occupation and thus I do not find it offensive (and believe me, im more British than you will ever be).
So allowing the irish of these chants (or even Americans from the British which I am sure there were), and denying the SA and the Palestinians would be a case of double standards.
The Palestinian case im more passionate about. We created Israel to rid Britain and Europe of the Jews, yet we paid no concern of those who lived their, the Palestinians. We also betrayed the Arabs (sykes picot agreement, balfour delcaration, handing it to UN).
We are now the most hated in the middle East - a region which has the worlds most richest history - and are paying in blood for it.
April 5th, 2008 at 5:41 am
We didn’t create Israel to “rid Britain and Europe of the Jews”, but your saying that is telling.
You are on crack, I swear. Or maybe chewing khat?
Actually, Israel was created as a result of the League of Nations Mandate of 1922, which granted a mandate to Great Britain to create a “National Home” for the Jews in Palestine. This right was based on the right to self determination, a right shared by all peoples.
I don’t even think I’m going to publish and/or engage you anymore because you write crazy stuff that isn’t worth responding to.
According to this Al Jazeera story, the palestinians, (after celebrating because the Jews are out of Gaza), are suddenly preplexed that they still have problems, even though the Jews are gone. In short: I think it’s high time people stopped blaming the jews for all their problems!!!
There’s that superiority complex again. So it doesn’t really matter that they’re a minority now…they’re planning a muslim population explosion in the West.
Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, Salahuddin Amin, Anthony Garcia and Jawad Akbar - first and second generation immigrants - responded to the tolerance of the British people by trying to kill as many of them as possible.(Daily Mail)
From Steve Gilbert’s “Transcriptions of UK Bombers Martyr Videos”
The leader of the group, ABDULA AHMED ALI: “BLESSED OPERATION”
That’s not very peaceful…but one thing is for sure: they’re willing to sacrifice themselves for the promise of eternal paradise…while taking as many infidels with them as possible. They’ve fooled themselves into thinking they’re taking revenge for lands that belong to them.
UMAR ISLAM: “REVENGE FOR YOUR ACTIONS”
Isn’t that cozy!
IBRAHIM SAVANT: “ENTER THE BATTLEFIELD”
Well…that is, in fact what these people do. In Saddam’s day, he would send the martyr’s family a $25,000 check.
TANVEER HUSSAIN: “WORTH THE PRICE”
Well, every time they kill the infidel, they are messing with US…so they’re stupid if they think we’re not going to respond.
ARAFAT WAHEED KHAN
So you say these people are fighting for “freedom”???? What exactly is the definition of that “freedom” -other than forcing dhimmitude upon the infidels??? And let’s not forget that Al Qaeda is also doing its share of killing other muslims!!!!
The moral relativism that equates what the terrorists are doing to any other country or group…is completely absurd….although I find it interesting that you see the world through the eyes of a jew-hating racist and bigot.
Muslims need to crawl out of the 7th century instead of trying to drag the world back there with them….whether it’s by the sword, through takeyya, kitman, or a hudna.
April 5th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Okay, let this be my final message on this website, since anti-”American govt foreign practices” feelings by me seems to be very disturbing for you.
Firstly regarding Israel: you said with a source that it was a LoN mandate in 1922. I disagree. The actual establishment happened much later, but what led to its formation was the Balfour declaration of 1917 between the British and the Zionists federation and their members (Chaim Weizemann). In which it states:
Then of course in 1947 I believe, Jewish terrorists blew up a British embassy killing 29 British soldiers and many more Arabs and Jews. Jewish extremists also were responsible for bombings in Rome. It subsequently led to the withdrawal of Britain from Palestine, and fell under hands of UN. The UN partition was approx 1/3 for Jews and 2/3 for Arabs, despite Jewish land ownership being a mere 7% at that time. It obviously led to war, and to the state it is in today, which is a complete reverse of the UN proposed partition.
Finally, you claimed:
I did not say the terrorists ever were fighting for freedom. What I did say was, how can you say the Americans are fighting for freedom in Iraq and justify the terrorists not when both are guilty of the same crimes?
IMHO, America is equally bad as the terrorists.
You also state:
Doesn’t this prove my statement that it is more akin to nationalism (of pan-Arabia, Iraq etc) than it is of religion. Their case is no different to the case of the Irish.
You also state:
You are accusing me of being an anti-semite because I believe that Palestine has the right to exist as a true soverign nation with borders? And also because I believe Israels constant violation of UN resolutions is dispicable? If you are, then the UK, the EU, the UN and the billions around the globe are all anti-semites in your book.
You finally stated:
Now that is a racist remark against the entire Muslim race. You are criticising not merely a religion, but every follower of that religion.
That draws the end of my post. You and your website supporters are free from my views.
I leave you with one final quote:
God Bless.
April 5th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Your stupidity is bothering me….and your jew-hating-lying bigotry is bothering me. Your revisionist history is breathtaking considering all the blood letting your terrorists buddies have done …and yet you don’t even stop to even acknowledge those facts. Your proud moslems murdered pregnant Tali Hatuel in Gaza with her four young daughters and lauded it as a ‘heroism’. They murdered 69-year old Leon Klingenhoffer in his wheelchair. Just like Che Guevera, they bind their victims before they slaughter them.
These acts are acts of cowardice. You can blame what you want on the jews…but Tali, her unborn child and her four daughters did not deserve to be gunned down in cold blood, and neither did Klingenhoffer deserve his fate.
The arab world has taught their children since they were little to murder the jews and the infidels…and they preach it in their mosques. Until that changes, we will be at war with the likes of the men above, who do it for rewards in paradise.
You ignored all that, I wonder why.
Instead, you change the subject to the evil Jooooz. Just like Muhammad, who in 627 AD, committed atrocities against the last remaining tribe of Jews in Medina; the Qurayza. He beheaded the men and the pubescent boys and enslaved the women and children. In so doing, he wiped an entire tribe ‘off the map’…something they’re still trying to do today.
So let’s hear how the evil Joooz were at fault for this, too. It’s always someone else’s fault, isn’t it, even when the prophet commands it?
“It is the soldier, not the reporter, Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, Who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the organizer, Who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier, Who salutes the flag, Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag, Who allows the protestor to burn the flag.
- Father Dennis Edward O’Brian, USMC (often incorrectly attributed to Charles M. Province)”
Author: - Father Dennis Edward O’Brian, USMC
April 6th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
“The Palestinian case im more passionate about. We created Israel to rid Britain and Europe of the Jews, yet we paid no concern of those who lived their, the Palestinians. We also betrayed the Arabs (sykes picot agreement, balfour delcaration, handing it to UN).
1948- There was a war between Israel and their neighboring arab states, after which most of the true Palestinians left and Arabs from other countries immigrated. There are very few true Palestinians in Palestine. Add to that the “Yom Kippur War” in (I think 78) where the Arabs decided to attack Israel during a holy holiday… nice hunh!). When that war ended, Israel had once again won. Avreal Sharone gave all the territories gained from that Victory back to Egypt a few years back except the Gaza Strip. Why? Egypt didn’t want it back. They knew that they didn’t want to deal with the extremist hotbed there from past experience. Now the US is funding and providing the Army Corps of Engineers to build a security wall on the Egypt/Palestinian border. Why… because the Egyptians don’t like the extremists coming over the border to obtain weapons and explosives and they know they would just a readily attack Egypt as they would Israel!!!
If your cause is Palestine… then you are taking up the torch for terrorist mongrels who’s whole purpose in life is to take over all who don’t agree with them and their extremist theology. All countries have a majority of people who just want to play nice and live in peace, but it’s the people who want power and how they go about getting it that concerns me.
April 7th, 2008 at 3:59 am
There are no Palestinian people.
30 years ago, there was little confusion on this issue of Palestine. The late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir making the bold political statement: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian people.”
On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said:
Arafat made a very definitive and unequivocal statement along the same lines as late as 1993. The “Palestinian nationhood” argument is the real strategic deception – one geared to set up the destruction of Israel.
Palestine has never existed as an autonomous entity. It was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their homeland.
There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1 percent of the landmass.
But that’s too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. Greed. Pride. Envy. Covetousness. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough.
What about Islam’s holy sites? There are none in Jerusalem.
The Koran says nothing about Jerusalem. It mentions Mecca hundreds of times. It mentions Medina countless times. It never mentions Jerusalem. With good reason. There is no historical evidence to suggest Mohammed ever visited Jerusalem.
So how did Jerusalem become the third holiest site of Islam? Muslims today cite a vague passage in the Koran, the seventeenth Sura, entitled “The Night Journey.” It relates that in a dream or a vision Mohammed was carried by night “from the sacred temple to the temple that is most remote, whose precinct we have blessed, that we might show him our signs. …” In the seventh century, some Muslims identified the two temples mentioned in this verse as being in Mecca and Jerusalem. And that’s as close as Islam’s connection with Jerusalem gets — myth, fantasy, wishful thinking. Meanwhile, Jews can trace their roots in Jerusalem back to the days of Abraham.
“There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not,” Dr. Philip Hitti, an Arab historian representing the Muslim world, told the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in 1946.
Yes, this commenter’s jew-hating bigotry is very telling…and propping Palestine as some kind of a “cause” is laughable, considering the facts. But he joins in with Hitler in terms of his hatred of the jews…this is the continuation of an ideology we thought we had stamped out in WWII. And continuing with that theme, Saddam was an admirer of Hitler –he liked to read the arabic version of mein kempf, and he modelled the chemical attacks on the kurds after Hitler’s “Final Solution”. The only difference is…Saddam didn’t think Hitler went FAR ENOUGH.
April 7th, 2008 at 8:12 am
History in the Middle East is so complicated and goes so far back in many cases, it is difficult to understand for most people without doing research. There are waaaay too many people listening to Hollywierd and “personalities” who state opinions as fact because it’s more convenient to have an opinion than it is to research and figure out the truth. It doesn’t surprise me that anti-sementic attitudes are as plentiful as they are. I used to admire Vanessa Redgrave until she went on anti-Zionist BS campaign at the Oscars several years ago, speaking proproganda where it didn’t belong. It makes me sick that so much hatred has overwhelmed this world. I remember my mother telling me over and over that movies are loaded with fiction to make historical events more interesting, and if you want to get at the truth, it requires spending time in a library (this was before the internet of course). Mom of course was right. But I wonder about all the kids coming up, sitting in classrooms where “the truth” is only told if it is convenient and politically correct.