Another blatant example of Islam’s hate-filled Judeophobia as…
Four Muslim attackers hold a Jewish passenger down, strangle him and hit him in the face, telling him ‘you have no country’
by, JTA | The Times of Israel | h/t Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller
Four unidentified Arab men savagely beat a French Jew in a Paris Metro train, a watchdog organization reported.
The attack happened Sunday as the train was traveling from Nogent Sur Marne to Gare de Lyon, according to the National Bureau for Vigilance Against Anti-Semitism, or BNVCA.
Two of the attackers held down the 28-year-old victim, who was identified only as A. Levy, while a third strangled him and beat his face, BNVCA said on its website Monday. The report said Levy sustained some injuries but did not specify.
His attackers shouted the Arab word for “Jews” before attacking Levy, who is a religious Jew belonging to the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, the report said. One of them also told him: “Jew, we are going to lay into you, you have no country,” according to the report.
They stopped assaulting Levy after one of the passengers said loudly that the police were coming, according to BNVCA.
The suspected attackers got off the Metro at the Chatelet-les Halles station in the heart of the French capital. Levy stayed on the train and filed a police complaint for aggravated assault at Gare de Lyon, the report said.
On Sunday, the SPCJ monitor unit of the French Jewish community reported in its annual summary that it had recorded 423 anti-Semitic incidents in France during 2013. The figure constitutes a 31-percent decrease over the previous year, but is still eight percent higher than in 2011.
Louis Farrakhan, racist Muslim and anti-Semitic Jew hater. Photo courtesy of: AP/Paul Beaty and The Times of Israel
by, JTA | The Times of Israel | h/t Blazing CatFur
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, saying “I don’t hate Jewish people,” denied he was anti-Semitic during an address to the group’s annual convention.
Farrakhan, who is known for his diatribes against the Jews, in his three-hour speech on Sunday night in Detroit compared himself to auto magnate Henry Ford, saying that Ford was “a great man who was called an anti-Semite.”
“I feel like I’m in good company,” Farrakhan told a crowd of about 18,000 at Joe Louis Arena, the Detroit Free Press reported.
“I don’t hate Jewish people … what I hate is evil,” he also said, adding that “Satan is in control of Hollywood,” as well as TV, the media and money.
Responding to Farrakhan’s speech, Heidi Budaj, Michigan regional director of the Anti-Defamation League, told the Detroit Free Press, “Expressing pride for being called anti-Semitic is shameful. A person in this day and age should be ashamed to say that.”
Farrakhan also reprimanded Muslims for fighting among themselves in the Middle East, saying they were killing each other for “America” and the “European infidel.”
He said that if the United States launched a war on Iran, “we ain’t fighting. We’re not killing no Muslims for these infidels.”
Farrakhan also touched on other topics, such as the African-American community separating from the rest of the world in order to better their lives and reinvesting in Detroit.
Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam on Jews:
by, Ibn Kammuna | Islam Watch
In this study, I will discuss the genocide of the Jewish tribe of Bani Qurayza by the prophet of Islam and the consequent moral implications. I will organize the flow of this study as follows:
1. Prelude to a genocide: Bani Qainuqa
2. Background on the Bani Qurayza incidents
3. Muhammad attacks Bani Qurayza
4. Who is Sa’d Bin Mu’ad?
5. Bani Qurayza genocide
6. Can there be a sufficient apologetic defense to this massacre?
7. Muslim apologetics
a. Bassam Zawadi
8. A look to the future
Prelude to a genocide: Siege of Bani Qainuqa
In 624 AD, Muhammad laid a siege upon the Jewish tribe of Bani Qainuqa. The siege lasted 15 days, after which the Qainuqa tribe unconditionally surrendered to Muhammad’s forces. One, who reads the narrations from authentic Islamic sources about the Qainuqa incidents, cannot deny the fact the Muhammad intended to behead all adult males of that tribe, and intended to enslave the women and children and take over their wealth. However, Muhammad was not strong enough yet in Medina, where he had emigrated to less than two years earlier (622 A. D). At the time of the Qainuqa incident, the powerful local leader of Medina was Abdullah bin Ubayy, chief of the Khazraj clan. He was a man of high status and was regarded as the city’s chief at the time of Muhammad’s arrival, although his power gradually decline thereafter with Muhammad’s rise. Nonetheless, Muhammad had to pay regard to Abdullah’s position and power, especially during his early years in Medina.
Arab tribes in those days used to form alliances with each other as part of coexistence, as well as mutual support in conflict situations. During the Qainuqa incident, Abdullah Bin Ubayy’s Khazraj tribe was ally of Qainuqa. In a previous conflict, Abdullah’s own life was saved by Qainuqa warriors. So, when Muhammad started preparation to slaughter the Qainuqa men, Abdullah Bin Ubayy firmly intervened on their behalf. The following Sirat quote is very telling of Ibn Ubayy’s relation to the Qainuqa, and of Muhammad’s evil intentions to slaughter them:
Abdullah b. Ubayy b. Salul went to him when God had put them (the Qainuqa tribe) in his power and said, ‘O Muhammad, deal kindly with my clients’ (now they were allies with Khazraj),but the apostle put him off. He repeated the words, and the apostle turned away from , whereupon he thrust his hand into the collar of the apostle’s robe; the apostle was so angry that his face became almost black. He said, ‘confound you, let me go.’ He answered, ‘No, by God, I will not let you go until you deal kindly with my clients. Four hundred men without mail and three hundred mailed protected me from all mine enemies; would you cut them down in one morning? By God, I am a man who fears that circumstances may change.’ The apostle said, ‘You can have them.’ (Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 363)
The above quote makes Muhammad’s intentions of slaughtering them en masse clear. To save the lives of his allies, Ibn Ubayy firmly demanded of Muhammad that another option be given to them. He was not going to let Muhammad kill them all in cold blood.
History tells us that Muhammad, in face of Abdullah’s firm intervention, decided to expelled the Qainuqa tribe from Medina, which saved their lives. Although Muhammad took over their homes and property, he stilled suffered a substantial loss by failing to enslave the women and children.
Baun Qainuqa, thus, survived Muhammad’s worst evil, a fate that Banu Qurayza also desired at a later time but was not granted.
Background of the Bani Qurayza incidents
After Muhammad’s emigration to there, its Pagan inhabitants easily accepted Islam, but not the Jews. Well-versed in Abrahamic doctrines, they debated and scrutinized Muhammad’s religious doctrines and discovered various errors in his verses. Thus, they thought Muhammad was an imposter, not a true prophet. So they rejected his message. Because of religious disagreements and the Jews’ refusal to embrace Islam, Muhammad and his community becoming hostile toward the Jews of Medina.
There were three major Jewish tribes in Medina: Bani Qaynuqa, Bani Al-Nadir, and Bani Qurayza. As Muhammad grew stronger in Medina, and realized that the Jews were not going to accept him as a prophet, his Qur’anic verses started becoming increasingly hostile towards people of the book (the Jews and the Christians). He also changed the Muslim prayer direction (called “Qibla” in Islam) from Jerusalem to Mecca.
In any case, Muhammad expelled the first two Jewish tribes – Bani Qaynuqa as well as Bani Al-Nadir – as he failed to genocide them due to intervention of powerful Abdullah ibn Obayy. In both occasions, Muhammad enriched himself and his community by capturing the wealth of those two rich Medina tribes. Bani Qurayza was the last major Jewish tribes left in Medina. In 627 AD, the stage was set for Muhammad to get rid of the last Jewish tribe of Medina. It was going to make him richer and stronger. So, why not?
The Meccans had had enough of raiding and plundering their commercial caravans by Muhammad’s robbing gang. So they came out to Medina to finish off Muhammad and his gang. They laid siege upon the community of Muhammad for a few weeks. As Muslims had dug a deep trench around their abode, which the Meccans could not overcome, they eventually had to withdraw the siege without achieving their goals. This came to be known as the Battle of the Trench (Al-Khandaq, A.D 627). After the Meccans were gone, words came to Muhammad that the Meccans were seeking the help of Banu Qurayza against him, and that Bani Qurayza had planned to extend their support. In reality, although a negotiation apparently did take place, Banu Qurayza never came to help the Meccans, thus staying true to their agreement with Muhammad not to help his enemies. The Meccan army did not make any attack on Muhammad’s community from the Bani Qurayza area of control, a testament to the fact that Bani Qurayza did not aid the Meccans during the Battle of the Trench.
In any case, this is one area of Arab history, where I wish there were people living in Mecca and Medina who documented such incidents and were neutral, or even anti-Muslim with regard to religious beliefs. The problem is that all we know about early Islam came to us from Islam-friendly sources. Imagine! All those horror stories we know about early Muslims came to us from Muslim-friendly sources. Those who refused Islam got killed, no questions asked. Saying negative things about Muhammad or Islam was no simple matter. Muhammad ordered the assassination of a hundred plus years old man, Abu Afak, just because he said some “not very nice things” about Muhammad. And when a mother of five, Asma Bint Marwan, heard of that and said some “negative” things about Muhammad, he ordered her assassination too. The assassin had to move away her nursing baby from her chest to be able to kill her. When you are talking about Muhammad and his Sahaba, you’ll be amazed at what that evil man can do. It is important for us to remember that even if the Qurayza tribe conspired against him, they never attacked or harmed any of the Muslims. And it is still true that no Meccan managed to get through to Medina and attack the Muslims through the area controlled by Bani Qurayza.
Again, I wish that we had more historical details about what exactly happened, but we don’t. If one is to rely on only Muslim-friendly sources, she probably won’t get the full story.
In any case, moving back to our story: When the Meccans left, Muhammad went home and started taking a bath during which a divine revelation came telling him to attack Bani Qurayza and get rid of them, and take all of their belongings:
Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 68:
Narrated ‘Aisha: When Allah’s Apostle returned on the day (of the battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench), he put down his arms and took a bath. Then Gabriel whose head was covered with dust, came to him saying, “You have put down your arms! By Allah, I have not put down my arms yet.” Allah’s Apostle said, “Where (to go now)?” Gabriel said, “This way,” pointing towards the tribe of Bani Quraiza. So Allah’s Apostle went out towards them.
Muhammad Attacks Bani Qurayza
With around 3000 worriers, and the Meccans out of sight, no wonder Allah tells him to go unprovoked and take over the fortunes of Bani Qurayza. Who is there to stop him? Muhammad laid siege to Bani Qurayza for twenty five days, after which they surrendered unconditionally. They did not offer any resistance. Before they surrendered, they asked Abu Lubabah, who was doing the negotiations between them and Muhammad, since he was on friendly terms with them from previous dealings, if they should submit to Muhammad’s judgement. Abu Lubabah said yes, and gestured with his hand to his throat, telling them that Muhammad is adamant on finishing them up. Such a gesture could only mean one thing: beheading. Afterwards, Abu Lubabah felt bad that he had betrayed Muhammad, but again, he had some passion to his old Jewish friends. In history, the gesture is not disputed. What is in disputed is why Abu Lubabah felt that he betrayed Muhammad. I think the answer is simple: Abu Lubabah knew what the murderer prophet was up to.
In any case, Bani Qurayza probably felt they had no option but to surrender. Muhammad’s criminals were three thousand strong. The mighty Meccans could not take care of him and his cronies, would one tribe in Medina be able to do it on its own? Surely not. So, instead of dying fighting Muhammad, they chose to surrender in the hopes that Muhammad will take their belongings and allow them to leave town, as he did with the previous tribes. However, this was not to be. Muhammad had become blood thirsty more and more as time passed by.
After the surrender of Bani Quaryza, Muhammad chose Sa’d bin Mu’ad, a Muslim, to declare the judgment against Bani Qurayza. References from different books and hadiths show that Muhammad was adamant on killing them. But other Muslim leaders, who had good past relationship with Bani Qurayza, forced him to choose someone else to declare a judgement against them. Muhammad did not allow them to choose another person, whom they wanted to judge the verdict. He named Sa’d bin Mu’ad and ended the discussion.
Who is Sa’d Bin Mu’ad?
Muhammad wanted Bani Qurayza men beheaded. In this manner, he will get all of their belongings and wealth. He, also, will have a large number of enslaved women and children. He can sell some of them. He can put them to work for his benefit. He and the Muslim men can enjoy some sexual activities with the women. Muhammad himself, history tells us, usually went after the young and pretty ones.
To be able to finish off the men of Bani Qurayza, what is better than naming the leader of their ally tribe, the Aus, Sa’d bin Mu’ad. Muhammad knew Sa’d bin Mu’ad and what he desires to do to those who rejected Islam. The above quoted “Sirat” has many telling passages about Sa’d bin Mu’ad and his nature. On page 297, we read the following:
.. that sa’d b. Mu’adh said: ‘ O prophet of God, let us make a booth (T. of palm branches)for you to occupy and have your riding camels standing by; then we will meet the enemy and if god gives us the victory that is what we desire; if the worst occurs you can mount your camels and join our people who are left behind, for they are just as deeply attached to you as we are. Had they thought that you would be fighting they would not have stayed behind. God will protect you by them; they will give you good counsel and fight with you.’ The apostle thanked him and blessed him. Then a booth was constructed for the apostle and he remained there.
The above quote shows Sa’d’s unparalleled loyalty to Islam and to Muhammad.
Page 301 of the Sirat gives us a clue about what Sa’d desired for the prisoners of war who were not Muslims:
God slew many of their chiefs and made captive many of their nobles. Meanwhile the apostle was in the hut and Sa’d bin Mu’adh was standing at the door of the hut girt with his sword. With him were some of the Ansar guarding the apostle for fear lest the enemy should come back at him. While the folk were laying hands on the prisoners the apostle, as I have been told, saw displeasure on the face of Sa’d at what they were doing. He said to him: ‘you seem to dislike what the people are doing.’ ‘Yes by God,’ he replied,’it is the first defeat god has brought on the infidel, and I would rather see them Slaughtered than left alive.’
The above quote, if anything, tells us what Sa’d’s judgement against Bani Qurayza would be. Sa’ds vision is clear: The one who rejects Islam or Muhammad must be put to death.
Sa’d was a born killer with very strong loyalty to Muhammad. He was also badly wounded in the Battle of the Trench, from which he soon died. So, he was not going to be sympathetic to Bani Qurayza, who rejected the prophet. He would kill you or me in an instant if Muhammad just says the word. Such was Sa’d Bin Mu’ad. My suspicion is that he also knew what Muhammad desired to do with Bani Qurayza. He was very close to Muhammad. In fact history tells us that the prophet put up a tent in the mosque for Sa’d so he could personally take care of him and his (Sa’d’s) wound. As one would expect, Sa’d’s judgment was what Muhammad wanted:
Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:
Narrated Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri:
When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad’s judgment, Allah’s Apostle sent for Sa’d who was near to him. Sa’d came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah’s Apostle said (to the Ansar), “Stand up for your leader.” Then Sa’d came and sat beside Allah’s Apostle who said to him. “These people are ready to accept your judgment.” Sa’d said, “I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners.” The Prophet then remarked, “O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah.”
It is interesting to note, here, Muhammad’s statement – that Sa’d’s judgment is Allah’s (God’s!). The fact of the matter is that whatever Muhammad wanted, became Allah’s and vice versa. So, the divine judgment has come and the crimes are almost as good as done. Here is how Muhammad accomplished his evil genocide on Bani Qurayza’s men. History tells us their numbers were between 600 and 900 men:
Bani Qurayza Genocide
During the night, trenches sufficient to contain the dead bodies of the men were dug across the market place of the city. In the morning, Mahomet, himself a spectator of the tragedy, commanded that male captives to be brought forth in companies of five or six at a time. Each company as it came up was made to sit down in a row on the brink of the trench destined for its grave, there beheaded, and the bodies cast therein. … The butchery, begun in the morning, lasted all day, and continued by torchlight till the evening. Having thus drenched the market place with the blood of seven or eight hundred victims, and having given command for the earth to be smoothed over their remains, Mahomet returned from the horrid spectacle to solace himself with the charms of Rihana, whose husband and all her male relatives had just perished in the massacre. [Source: W. Muir, The Life of Muhammad, (Edinburg 1923, Pages 307-8)].
One wonders what kind of a beast would do such an evil act, then thinks about sex. Rihana was a woman whose husband and all adult male relatives had just been killed by Muhammad. Yet, this did not prevent Muhammad from raping her. The Sirat book quoted earlier says that Muhammad “had proposed to marry her”. Her answer was in the negative. She rightfully showed repugnance towards Islam and clung to Judaism.(page 466)
History tells us that Rayhana stayed with Muhammad as his concubine until his death. She refused his offer to marry her. I plan to write an article in the near future on Muhammad being a despicable rapist. The above is one of the pieces of evidence I plan to use to show that Muhammad was a rapist. Those Muslims who will deny this accusation will have to show that when someone kills a woman’s husband and all of her adult male relatives, that woman is more than willing to have consensual sex with the murderer right away.
Moving along ..
As one of the Bani Qurayza women sees the spectacle taking place in the today’s medina market, she becomes hysterical and delirious. Muhammad’s Sahaba take care of her the best way they know how:
Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2665:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I. I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.
Hassan bin Thabet; a medinan Muslim poet writes an imagery about the day of the Qurayza genocide (Sirat, p.480):
Qurayza met their misfortune
And in humiliation found no helper.
A calamity worse than that which fell B. al-Nadir befell them
The day that God’s apostle came to them like a brilliant moon,
When fresh horses bearing horsemen like hawks.
We left them with the blood upon them like a pool
They having accomplished nothing.
They lay prostrate with vultures circling round them.
Thus are the obstinate and impious rewarded.
Such are the acts of the prophet of Islam and his Sahaba. Those are the people who are supposed to be an example of conduct to all mankind!
The genocide of Bani Qurayza was for the men. Any male who had grown pubic hair was killed:
Sunan Abu Dawud: Book #38, Hadith #4390
Narrated Atiyyah al-qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
The rest of the tribe’s members (the women and children) were enslaved. The tribes’ belongings went to Muhammad and the rest of the criminals. Muhammad’s economic situation improved tremendously after this massive act of evil:
Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 53, Number 357:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
People used to give some of their date palms to the Prophet (as a gift), till he conquered Bani Quraiza and Bani An-Nadir, whereupon he started returning their favors.
Can there be a sufficient apologetic defense to this massacre?
Islam has its apologetics. If Muhammad’s crime is assassinating a woman, or an old man, they can create a scenario to make it plausible that Muhammad may have been justified in what he did. I studied many of Muhammad’s assassinations and published many articles about that. There are a lot of Muslim apologetics on the web who try to defend Muhammad and the early Muslims. None, of what I have seen on the web, in my view, made a successful defense of Muhammad and Islam.
Bani Qurayza genocide was done on a massive scale. So, the Muslim apologetic cannot, in principle cannot, defend Muhammad and the early Muslims. You see, we are not talking about one person here. Let’s say the Qurayza men who were beheaded were 700 men. That is 700 hundred crimes committed by Muhammad. Seven hundred purposeful killings. Can any decent human beings see that a defense of Muhammad’s crimes in this instance even remotely plausible? Muslim apologetics really have no shame. You can find their writings on the web defending Muhammad and the early Muslims on the Bani Qurayza story too.
There are actually Multiple crimes committed in this story. There are seven hundred plus killings. There is the beheading of the Qurayza woman crime. There are the crimes of taking the belongings of Bani Qurayza. There are the crimes of rapes that the Muslim men inflected on the Qurayza women. Also, Authentic Hadith tells us that Muhammad sent a group of Qurayza women to Yemen. They were sold in order that the Muslims buy weapons. So, there are the crimes of putting all those women into slavery:
Then the apostle sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari brother of b.’Abduk-Ashhal with some of the captive women of B. Qurayza to najd and he sold them for horses and weapons
[Source: W. Muir, The Life of Muhammad, (Edinburg 1923, p.466)].
There are many crimes committed here. Muslim apologetics do not have a shame when they try to defend Muhammad in the Qurayza events. There is really no sufficient defense. I am not saying that to condemn Muhammad and the Muslims and not allow the Muslim apologetics to have their say. It is not like that at all. How can anyone justify seven hundred plus homicides? A favorite of Muslims apologetics is that some of the Qurayza leaders conspired against Muhammad during the battle of the trench. This matter is not clear at all in the historical sources. But, let us for a moment say that some of the Qurayza leaders did conspire against Muhammad. Is that a sufficient reason to annihilate the whole tribe? There were kids who were twelve or thirteen years old who got beheaded that day just because they had grown some pubic hair. How can any decent human being defend the Muslims and Muhammad when it comes to beheading such young lads who had not yet understood the nature of life to start with? I discuss some specifics of the Muslim apologetics responses in the second part of this study.
It is not enough for the Muslim apologetic to say that Bani Qurayza were guilty, or that they were judged by their Torah. Here we have a large number of people beheaded in one day. The problem is most of them, if not all, are innocent. Completely innocent! There is, in principle, no justification, for what Muhammad and his followers did. This is why I affirm in this article, that Muslim apologetics have no shame in defending Muhammad and the Muslims when it comes to the genocide of Bani Qurayza.
There are current-day Muslim apologetics who deny that the Qurayza massacre ever took place, or if it ever happened, it was only the “treacherous” leaders of Bani Qurayza who were beheaded. The rest of the tribe survived. Such an apologetic defense is worthless in my view. Authentic Islamic sources of Hadith, Sirat, and Qur’an testify to the contrary. Hence, I will not include such a defense in this current treatment.
In this part, which I may expand to include other Islamist apologetics, I discuss some of what Bassam Zawadi wrote regarding the Bani Qurayza massacre
a) Bassam Zawadi
Writing in defense of the claim that not all the Qurayza folks were executed, Mr. Zawadi says:
At that time, anyone who reached the age of puberty was eligible to fight and was thus considered to be a warrior and they were only ordered to be executed if they fought against the Muslims. I already showed that the ones who stuck to the treaty were spared.
Zawadi’s above claim is bogus and cannot be substantiated. There is no record in Islamic sources telling that only the ones, of Bani Qurayza, who fought the Muslims were killed. In fact, according to his criterion all of the Bani Qurayza men should have survived. None of them fought the Muslims. In fact, Muhammad is the aggressor. He is the one who attacked them and laid siege to them.
However, I personally believe that all able-bodied men were executed, for it would have been possible for the Bani Qurayda men to surrender their leaders over to the Muslims. IF they weren’t able to do so then they could have at least escaped the fortress and joined the Muslim side in order to abide by the peace treaty. However, they sheltered those criminals, defended them and protected them. They were an obstruction to justice and therefore deserved the same fate as their leaders. Indeed they deserved to be punished
Zawadi continues to say that Bani Qurayza were dealt with according to the tenets of their own holy book; the Torah:
10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies (Deuteronomy 20:10-12)
The above is actually a misquote of the old testament. The old testament command was meant for a certain situation, and not as a general rule. Zawadi wants to justify the annihilation of an entire tribe. He uses the Bible for justification. He uses the argument that the leaders of the Bani Qurayza were treacherous and sided with the Meccans. All of this is well and good except for the “Pudding”. A well-known English saying is “the proof is in the pudding”. The fact of the matter is that Meccans did not go through the Bani Qurayza quarter to attack the Muslims. This fact shows that there was no treachery on the Qurayza part. And, even if some of their leaders were treacherous, they were not treacherous enough to abandon their protection agreement with the Muslims.
While historial narrations are lacking regarding this matter, we know for sure that the Muslims were not attacked during the Meccan trench siege to Medina through the Bani Qurayza controlled zone.
The conclusion that Zawadi draws regarding Bani Qurayza is very telling of his train of thought (numbers added are mine):
1 To most people it could appear that the punishment that the Jews faced was too extreme. However, on the contrary what was more extreme is how the Jews deceptively tricked the Muslims by breaking the treaty and wanted to end their very existence. For such treachery they indeed deserved what they got. 2 If any Christian wants to condemn this judgment then he is actually condemning his own Bible because it was by a law found in their Bible which the Jews were judged by. 3 Plus it was not Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who issued the order; it was Saad bin Muadh whom the Jews selected to judge their fate.
4 The Muslims needed to make examples out of these people. You can’t expect the Muslims to go and forgive those who fight against them. That would just encourage more people to go and fight against the Muslims. If you think about it, the Muslims resorted to such extreme measures only when it was necessary and not for revenge. It was necessary to show everyone that you cannot go and mess with Muslims by fighting against them. The Prophet (peace be upon him) was in charge of the security of his people. If he went on forgiving anyone who attacked them, then this would only encourage people to fight against the Muslims, since they would think that even if they lose the Muslims will simply forgive them.
1. According to Zawadi it was more extreme to break a treaty with the Muslims (a matter that has not been substantiated by historical narrations), than annihilating 800 adult men. And who says Muslim apologetics do not have a sense of humor!
2. Condemning what happened to Bani Qurayza amounts to condemning the biblical teachings (mainly the Old Testament injunction that I quoted earlier). I am reiterating myself here: the Old Testament injunction here was a special case in history. It was not to give a blank check to the Jews to do whatever they feel is needed during war times.
3. True, it was Sa’d Bin Mu’adh who made the call. However, this was Muhammad’s plan all along. Sa’d was a decoy for Muhammad as evidenced by Muhammad’s reaction when Sa’d pronounced the judgement. Muhammad Said, “O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah.”
4. We do expect Muhammad to be a forgiving person. Even if there were few treacherous leaders in Bani Qurayza (a matter in great dispute in history), why annihilate the whole tribe?
A Look To The Future
Muhammad and the Muslims took over the Arabian Peninsula and spread beyond. So, Bani Qurayza victims have not been vindicated or honored in any way. I plan to write about Bani Qurayza every now and then just to honor them and remind myself and others of them. Humanity needs to remember them too. Humanity needs to honor them. Saudi Arabia is still ruled by Islam; a sixth century barbaric religion. However, I look to a day when Saudi Arabia comes to realize how evil Islam is and was. I look to a day when a large shrine is built in the Medina market where Bani Qurayza men were killed. In that shrine, there will be lists of names of those who perished that day, and some of their stories and poetry that was preserved. People from all over the globe will go there just to visit that shrine, pay tribute and respect and honor those victims and say: Never again we will allow a thug and his bandits do such an evil act against a group of people as was done to Bani Qurayza.
1,400 Years Later..
Members of the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant [DAESH] in Gaza. (Image source: DAESH YouTube video)
by, Khaled Abu Toameh | Gatestone Institute
“This group is much more dangerous and radical than Hamas.” — Palestinian journalist, Gaza City
Palestinians are worried that DAESH terrorists will perpetrate atrocities against those who oppose their ideology and activities.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas need to take into consideration the possibility that Palestinian unity on the pre-1967 lines would pave the way for DAESH terrorists to move into the West Bank.
It’s official: Al-Qaeda has begun operating in the Gaza Strip.
A video posted on YouTube this week showed terrorists belonging to the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, known colloquially by its Arabic acronym, DAESH, announcing plans to wage jihad [holy war] against the “infidels, traitors and Crusaders.”
This is the first time that a group linked to Al-Qaeda announces its presence in the Gaza Strip.
The announcement is seen as a challenge to the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas, which has been in control of the Gaza Strip since July 2007.
Palestinian Authority security officials in Ramallah expressed fear that the Al-Qaeda-affiliated group would try to establish terrorist cells also in the West Bank.
The video features 10 heavily-armed masked terrorists declaring allegiance to DAESH, whose men are responsible for most of the atrocities in Syria and Iraq over the past few years.
In the video, a spokesman for the group announces that in addition to Syria and Iraq, DAESH now has “lions and armies in the environs of Jerusalem.”
The spokesman says that the group’s goal is to restore the dignity of Muslims who have been “humiliated” by their enemies. He urges Muslims to rally behind his group and support its members in their jihad against the enemies of Islam and “Arab tyrants.”
Palestinians have reacted with panic to the emergence of the Al-Qaeda-affiliated group in the Gaza Strip.
According to reports from the Gaza Strip, Palestinians are worried that the DAESH terrorists will perpetrate atrocities against those who oppose their ideology and activities.
“This group is much more dangerous and radical than Hamas,” said a Palestinian journalist from Gaza City. “The presence of Al-Qaeda in the Gaza Strip is bad news not only for Hamas, but for all Palestinians. Palestinians see the crimes and massacres perpetrated by Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria and fear that they could be repeated in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.”
Hamas leaders, for their part, have reacted with skepticism to the announcement by DAESH, describing it as another attempt to “distort” Hamas’s image and “resistance.”
Salah Bardaweel, a senior Hamas official in the Gaza Strip, said that the Gaza Strip was a “small area with no room for Al-Qaeda-affiliated groups.”
Hamas has not hesitated in the past to confront tiny jihadi groups whose members had openly challenged its rule. Like DAESH, these groups believe that Hamas is too “moderate” and is no longer committed to the “armed struggle” against Israel.
In one of the deadliest confrontations, Hamas security forces killed and arrested a number of jihadi terrorists who found shelter in a mosque in the town of Rafah in the Gaza Strip. At least 28 jihadi terrorists were killed and 120 wounded during the 2009 raid on members of a group called Jund Allah [Soldiers of God].
It now remains to be seen whether Hamas will be able to crush the new Al-Qaeda-affiliated group, whose members are also operating in the neighboring Sinai Peninsula.
Those who are talking about “reuniting” the Gaza Strip and the West Bank can no longer ignore the presence of the Al-Qaeda terrorists on the streets of the Gaza Strip.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas continues to talk about the need for Palestinian unity to pave the way for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem. Last week, he even dispatched a senior Fatah delegation to the Gaza Strip to discuss ways of ending the dispute between his party and Hamas.
Now that Al-Qaeda has begun operating in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas needs to consider the possibility that Palestinian unity would pave the way for the DAESH terrorists to move into the West Bank – an outcome U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his team need to take into consideration when they talk about the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem on the pre-1967 lines.
by, Garrett Haley | Christian News Network
ISRAEL – The Israeli government has announced that it will begin offering free abortions to women who are between the ages of 20 and 33.
According to The Times of Israel, Dr. Yonatan Halevy—head of Israel’s Health Ministry commission—recently announced changes to the country’s government-subsidized “health basket.” As a result of the changes, which were approved by the cabinet, the government will offer 20- to 33-year-old women free, state-subsidized abortions.
“We want large families in Israel,” Halevy said. “We definitely encourage birth. But when pregnancy occurs and it is undesired or inadvertent, I think we should supply the means to end the pregnancy properly.”
For several years, the Israeli government has offered subsidized abortions to women who are under the age of 20 or over the age of 40. However, this year’s policy changes will dramatically expand the coverage and availability of free abortions.
The new measures will not require women to present any medical reason for ending the life of the child, thus enacting abortion on demand.
Political observers say the new abortion law is “among the world’s most liberal.”
“There is no country in the world where its citizens are entitled to public funding for such a wide basket of services,” Halevy stated.
Though abortion advocates are heralding the new abortion policy as a significant victory, pro-life Israeli leaders are strongly criticizing the law. Chief Rabbi of Israel Yona Metzger and Chief Sephardic Rabbi of Israel Shlomo Amar issued a letter, in which they called abortion “murder.”
“As in [the] past,” their letter reads, “we call on all rabbis in Israel … [to support] the severe prohibition of abortion.”
Life Site News reports that Dr. Eli Schussheim, director of the pro-life organization Efrat, believes abortions present a major threat to Israel’s small population.
“Israel has lost more than one and a half million Jewish children to abortion since 1948,” he said. “In a country of about 5.5 million Jews, this number has great demographic significance. Imagine how much stronger Israel would have been today with one million more Jews.”
Despite the widespread availability of abortions in Israel, pro-life leaders plead with women to not terminate their pregnancies. In an open letter on their website, Efrat spokespersons say “abortion means ending the life of child who is not sufficiently developed to survive outside its mother’s womb.”
“Although the vast majority of abortions are performed on socio-economic grounds, an abortion does not resolve financial or social difficulties,” the letter states. “Very often, the psychological scars caused by an abortion only serve to complicate existing problems. Sometimes, it takes women a lifetime to resolve these issues.”
“Economic and social problems can be worked out,” the letter adds. “Situations can—and do—change. But a life can never be restored.”
“In our thirty-five years of experience educating women,” the Efrat letter concludes, “we have never seen a woman who regretted having her baby.”
Now it appears the number one murderer of Jewish children will be Jewish adults.
Scuffles break out as English Defence League supporters face a barrage of missiles from Muslim fascists in Slough while the anti-Islamic group staged a protest in the Berkshire town earlier today. All Photos Courtesy of: Daily Mail Online
- Violence erupted as EDL supporters marched into Slough’s High Street
- The EDL were opposed by fascists and the Slough Trades Union Council
- Police were forced to don riot gear and let dogs loose to regain control
by, Damien Gayle | Daily Mail Online – UK | h/t Blazing CatFur
Two police officers were injured and four people arrested when violence broke out between English Defence League marchers and counter-demonstrators today.
Bottles and railings were hurled and at least one smoke bomb was set off as the anti-Islamic group marched through the centre of Slough, Berkshire, where the fascists were waiting.
Officers were forced to don riot gear and let dogs loose in an effort to quell the violence, which resulted in four people being held for public order offences.
One police officer suffered facial injuries and another had an injury to his leg.
The EDL’s march through Slough was in protest against plans for an all-girls Muslim faith school in the city and a Muslim community centre in Langley.
It was met by counter-demonstrations led by the Slough Trades Union Council and the Fascist Network, who accuse the EDL of fascist tendencies.
Authorities estimate that up to 600 people took park in the opposing demonstrations today.
The march descended into violence as EDL supporters entered Slough’s High Street, where street fighting broke out with both police and antifascists.
Authorities estimate that up to 600 people took park in the opposing demonstrations, which were policed by officers from across Thames Valley Police, Hampshire Constabulary and the British Transport Police.
EDL supporters wave Welsh and Israeli flags and shout slogans during their demonstration, which was in protest against a new Muslim school and an Islamic community centre which are planned for the area.
A police spokesman said: ‘The two opposing demonstrations held in Slough passed off without major incident for Thames Valley Police and Slough Borough Council.
‘It is estimated that between 500 to 600 people took part in both demonstrations, one by the English Defence League and a counter demonstration.
‘A number of officers from across Thames Valley Police, Hampshire Constabulary and British Transport Police were visible during the demonstrations as part of a pre-planned comprehensive and proportionate policing operation.
‘A small amount of disorder did break out in the town centre. However officers quickly dealt with the incidents and maintained control of the situation. Four people were arrested for various public order offences.
‘Two officers were injured during the demonstration; one sustained facial injuries and the other an injury to his leg.’
Black-clad Islamic fascists clash with police as they try to oppose the EDL’s march down Slough’s High Street, where bottles and railings were hurled and at least one smoke bomb let off during the fracas.
Superintendent Simon Bowden, local police commander for Slough, said: ‘I am pleased that these demonstrations have passed off without major incident.
‘Disruption was kept to a minimum and we are grateful for the support we received from local communities.
‘There were a handful of arrests made over the course of the day, mainly for public disorder. However, the vast majority of those taking part were well behaved.
‘The demonstrations had understandably caused a great deal of concern amongst some of our communities and I would like to thank them for their tolerance, co-operation and patience.’
Councillor Rob Anderson, leader of Slough Borough Council, said: ‘It was a shame that some elements felt the need to resort to violence but the police dealt with it swiftly and appropriately.
‘Hopefully we can get back to normal in Slough now these groups have left our town.’
Rabbi Baruch Frydman-Kohl, “Pretend-to-be” Jew.
by, Paul Lungen – Staff Reporter | The Canadian Jewish News | Scaramouche | h/t Blazing CatFur
They didn’t all get together, hold hands and sing Kumbaya – but they came pretty close.
Participants in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s trip to Israel were positively gushing about the prime minister’s performance on the world stage, with several referring to his speech in the Knesset as the highlight.
Rabbis on the trip also mentioned the interaction between colleagues from various denominations of Judaism as a happy unintended consequence of the trip, which saw more than 200 community leaders, rabbis and businesspeople join the Canadian delegation as an “accompanying party.”
Referring to Harper’s address to the Knesset, Toronto lawyer Berl Nadler, a member of the board of directors of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) called it “a stirring piece of oratorical clarity on the issues.
“I think he was intellectually honest on the origins of anti-Zionism in a way even Jewish community leaders are not,” he said.
“There are very few world leaders who have as well thought-out a position,” he said. And considering the criticism he faced for drawing too close to Israel, Nadler said, “I think it’s a pretty gutsy thing to do. The prime minister has the courage of his convictions. They’re well thought-out political positions, based on facts, and well articulated.”
Nadler said the prime minister’s forceful address seemed to catch even members of the Knesset off guard, with his address being greeted by standing ovations.
Later, Harper visited the Western Wall. “You should have seen the cheering at the Kotel. It was heartwarming. It was like he was being welcomed as a genuine political and moral hero, a person prepared to take positions that are unpopular,” Nadler said.
Rabbi Philip Scheim, spiritual leader of Toronto’s Beth David B’nai Israel Beth Am Congregation, said, “For all of us, the highlight was the appearance at the Knesset. The sense of pride we had of the prime minister standing up in the Knesset, giving as pro-Israel a speech as can be, from the heart…
“He knew he would get flack” from some opponents, he said, referring to critics who say Canada is best served with a more even-handed approach to the Middle East.
“We were so taken by this man’s love of Israel, and without an ulterior motive,” he said. “He feels that Israel is a manifestation of justice and a rectification of the wrongs of history.
“When a prime minister stands up and positions Israel as a manifestation of light in the world, I can’t imagine anything more heartwarming,” Rabbi Scheim said.
Rabbi Jarrod Grover of Beth Tikvah Synagogue in Toronto, called the trip a “wonderful moment after wonderful moment – with a lot of waiting in between.”
Harper’s Knesset speech, his welcome by Israeli parliamentarians were “very powerful moments,” Rabbi Grover said.
“We’ve been working at this for a long time. It’s a dream come true.
“What’s the point of Israel advocacy if not this,” he continued. “We’ve been working to convince not just the Harper government, but Canadians in general, that they should be more [favourable] to Israel,” he said.
He rejected suggestions that political leaders should be more even-handed. “Why be temporizing every comment of support for Israel with ‘buts,’ ‘howevers’? That’s singling out Israel unfairly for everything wrong in the country instead of celebrating the many things they got right in a region that is collapsing. That even-handed position did us no good. We should be proud the prime minister sees that.”
For Vancouver lawyer Bernard Pinsky, Harper’s visit marked “the conjunction of two things I love – my country Canada and the country of Israel.
“I don’t see any conflict between loving and supporting them both. You can do both unconditionally. I want to be involved in making both places successful.”
Pinsky, past chair of the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver and past member of CIJA’s board, among other community leadership roles, said there were several memorable events during the trip. Standing at the Kotel as the prime minister approached, he was surprised to see “a group of Chassidim… shouting and excited and frenzied with joy” to see Harper.
On another occasion, on a bus to Tel Aviv University, the group could see Israelis standing on the roadside “with signs saying, ‘We love you Harper.’”
And at Yad Vashem, the group waited for quite awhile as the prime minister took a private tour of the Holocaust museum.
“We waited a long time, because he spent a lot of time at Yad Vashem,” Pinsky said. “To me, that was meaningful… He really feels that’s important. I really feel he got it. He’s a deep, intellectual guy who thinks things through.”
Rabbi Grover spoke of the benefit of spending time with his Jewish colleagues, as well as a few Christian ministers. “We spoke on the religious direction of the country and the challenges we face,” he said.
“This was really not just about Harper and the trip to Israel. It was a bonding experience for people who accompanied him. The Jewish community should feel good that we have so many friends in the government and across the country,” he added.
The one regret Rabbi Grover expressed was that “the visits were exclusive and secluded.” Even the highway was cleared to ensure Harper’s safety, he said.
“The prime minister saw the major sites, but he didn’t really get to see Israel.” Even taking him out for a coffee on Ben Yehuda, a pedestrian street in Jerusalem, would have exposed him “to the people, the culture, the real vibrancy of the country,” he said.
* * *
Though some 200 individuals were part of the “accompanying party” that joined the official delegation, questions have been raised as to who made the list and who didn’t.
Rabbi Baruch Frydman-Kohl of Beth Tzedec Congregation, one of Toronto’s largest synagogues, was not among those invited on the trip.
He’s not sure why. There has been some discussion in the community about the list. “Jews talk about all kinds of things. People talk, who is on, who was not on.”
According to Rabbi Frydman-Kohl, Pinsky and Nadler, the Prime Minister’s Office made the final list after soliciting suggestions from major Jewish organizations. MPs submitted their own lists.
Rabbi Grover said that’s how he was included, noting he has developed a personal relationship with his shul’s local MP, Chungsen Leung.
How the list was chosen is less significant than the trip itself, Rabbi Frydman-Kohl stated.
“What’s really important is what the prime minister did there and what it represents, both to him personally and as head of government, and to us, as a statement on Canadian policy in the Middle East. So we have to keep our eyes on the big picture.
“I’m thrilled. I think this has been a home run for the prime minister and, more importantly, a home run for Canada,” he added.
by, Staff | The Tower | h/t Blazing CatFur
Last December Israel conducted the third of four planned prisoner releases, part of a basket of confidence building measures designed to coax Palestinian diplomats into peace negotiations and keep them there. Each release has proven more controversial than the last, with the Palestinian public and Palestinian leaders staging spectacles celebrating the freed murderers as heroes.
Issa Abd Rabbo – a Palestinian terrorist who in 1984 came upon two Israeli university students who were hiking, tied them up at gunpoint, and then murdered them – was among those released last October. Palestinian Authority (PA) president Mahmoud Abbasembraced him at a ceremony celebrating the release and lifted up Rabbo’s hands in victory. The effusiveness was directly linked to deepening misgivings among Israelis regarding the releases.
This interview, which shows Rabbo speaking with Palestinian media outlet Ma’an a few weeks ago, won’t help:
Issa Abd Rabbo: “There was supposed to be a military operation shooting at a bus transporting Israeli soldiers… I was surprised when on my way to the area, I waited, waited and waited and the bus didn’t come. I was forced to carry out an operation on my own, an improvisation, I took it upon myself. An Israeli car approached, with two in it. I said, here’s a chance and I don’t want to return empty-handed. They left the car… and walked towards the valley, and sat down under a pine tree. I went down to them. Of course I was masked and was carrying a rifle. He asked me: Are you a guard here? I told him: ‘No, I’m in my home.’ I told him: ‘You are not allowed here. This is our land and our country. You stole it and occupied our land and I’m going to act against you.’ They were surprised by what I told them. I tied them up of course and then sentenced them to death by shooting, in the name of the revolution. I shot them, one bullet each, and went [hiding] in the mountains… I went to my aunt and told her: ‘We have avenged Muhammad’s blood.’”
Host: “She is the mother of Martyr Muhammad Abd Rabbo.”
Issa Abd Rabbo: “I told her: ‘Instead of one, we got two.’ She cried out in joy.”
Video Courtesy of: Palwatch
The Israelis have long emphasized that Palestinian incitement – which ranges fromterrorist glorification to the denial of Jewish rights – fundamentally erodes the prerequisites for peace on both side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Israeli officials linked the Palestinian glorification of terrorists to among other things the murder Seraya Ofer, who was killed outside his home in the Jordan Valley. Ofer’s killers subsequently confirmed the suspicion, using rhetoric describing the murder as “a gift”:
Two week before the attack, the murder suspects arrived at Ofer’s home in the vacation resort of Barush to surveillance the area ahead of a violent robbery they were planning, according to their testimony. “After learning that a senior army officer lived there, who might be armed, they decided to carry out a murder ‘as a gift to the Palestinian people and to Hamas prisoners for the festival of sacrifice [Eid al-Adha],’” the suspects said during questioning, according to the Shin Bet.
I S L A M I N C.
M U R D E R I N G J E W S S I N C E 5 7 0 C E
Hassan Abu Ali, a 15-year old Syrian Jihadist, who wants to bring the battle to “Palestine.” Photo: Screenshot / VICE News. Photo Courtesy of: The Algemeiner
by, Joshua Levitt | The Algemeiner | h/t Blazing CatFur
In recent footage from a Syrian Jihadist training camp in Aleppo, Mohammed Hussein, founder of Bin Laden Front,told a camera crew from VICE News that the militants’s goal was to topple the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, then its “aim is to liberate greater Syria.”
Hassan Abu Ali, a 15-year old fighter profiled in the report, told VICE, “Once Syria is liberated, our next mission is to liberate Palestine and Golan and continue our conquests. Thanks be to Allah.”
Hussein, the group’s leader, described the Bin Laden Front, one of many Jihadist armies fighting the regime outside of Aleppo and in the Syrian countryside, as a direct outgrowth of his training under 9-11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, in 2001.
The footage, uploaded to YouTube last week, also profiled a female school teacher who, clad in burka and fatigues, was leading an all-female cell in military maneuvers through burnt-out Aleppo. Like the others, she said her anger was directed at the regime: “We are most unmerciful with those who raised their weapon to their own people and we would crush with our feet not only Bashar but whoever supports him.”
Syria: Al-Qaeda’s New Home
The greater question of Jihad and its call for death as a martyr was also probed in one scene, in particular, with 15-year-old Abu Ali, trying to convince his fair-haired younger sister, still a toddler, of the value of him dying for the cause. “The revolution has opened my eyes to the true nature of the regime,” he told her.
After pushing her on a swing, Abu Ali is sitting next to her on a sofa in their family’s house with his rifle by his side, and she asks him if he’s going to go play with it, and he responds that he’s going into battle with it.
“G-d willing, we’ll be victorious and then I’ll be granted martyrdom,” Abu Ali tells her, but she says, “No.”
“We’ll be victorious and we’ll be granted martyrdom,” he insists. She, again, responds, “No.”
“Why not?” he asks.
“We’ve got only one, Abu Ali, you,” she says.
“Excuse me?” the young Jihadist asks.
“You are our only Abu Ali,” she says, already, as a child, understanding the impact his choice of martyrdom will have on their family.
“Hijacking The Holy Land” takes you behind the headlines and past the media bias against Israel. The Palestinians have been trying to sell “land for peace” for decades. Find out why this tactic will never work. Learn what history has to say about Israel ‘s borders and how the Six Day War was a miracle from start to finish.
See how the Security Fence is both the most humane and effective measure to prevent terrorism. Go inside the world of Palestinian media and watch incredible video clips of Palestinian politicians and clerics. You won’t believe what you see—the lies, the incitement and the hatred, all caught on tape!
Witness how Palestinian Propaganda seeks to rob the Jewish people of their rich history in the Land of Israel. Children are taught and encouraged to aspire to kill Jews and to become suicide bombers. You’ll be shocked at what is being taught in Palestinian schools.
The Hamas organization has successfully turned the focus of the conflict from politics to religion. Hamas is a terrorist group whose very charter clearly states that its goal is the destruction of the Jewish State! These are the people the world is trying to force Israel to make peace with! Radical Islam is on the rise and openly promotes hatred and violence towards the Jewish people, not only in Israel but around the world.
Is there any real hope for peace in the Middle East ? Is a “Two State” solution the right option? These and many other important issues are addressed in “Conflict: The Power of Propaganda.”
Hamas youth terrorists. Photo Courtesy of: The Times of Israel
by, Lazar Berman and Elhanan Miller | The Times of Israel
Love death for the sake of Allah as much as our enemies love life,” Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh told thousands of young Palestinians at last week’s graduation ceremony for Hamas camps in the Gaza Strip’s Yarmouk Stadium.
Haniyeh and other senior Hamas officials exhorted the young graduates to not only annihilate Israel, but also to carry their fight across the globe, in a January 16 Al-Aqsa TV broadcast translated by MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute.
“This generation, Allah willing, will vanquish Israel,” said Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hammad.
“Let me congratulate you on your future victory,” Hammad continued, “and on the annihilation of Israel. As I said yesterday, they only have eight years left.”
“We pray for Allah to choose leaders and martyrs from among you, not only in Palestine, but throughout planet earth, so that the call for jihad will spread all over the world, and the entire world will embrace the religion of Allah.”
The camps, titled “the pioneers of liberation,” are run by Hamas’s ministries of education and interior. Some 13,000 students in grades 10-12 participated in the one-week training camps this year, compared to 5,000 last year when the program was launched, Israeli sources with knowledge of the program said.
The corps of instructors consists mainly of active members of Hamas’s security forces, and the curriculum includes weapons training, first aid, self defense, marching exercises and “security awareness” classes on identifying Israeli spies.
“Continue what you began in the camps,” Hamas Education Minister Osama al-Mazini urged. “Memorize what you have learned, and implement it in the battlefield when you meet the enemy.”
The footage showed thousands of young Palestinians, dressed in black, standing in formation as they listened to senior Hamas officials urging them to die in battle against the Zionist enemy.
Later in the clip, the graduates are seen performing military drills often seen in terrorist training videos, including clambering over walls, swinging across monkey bars, and jumping through burning obstacles. They also held RPGs and rifles.
“Nothing awaits you here but to be killed or to leave,” declared a camp graduate. “Our message to the Zionist enemy, everywhere and at any time, is this: You shall never enjoy a pleasant life on our beloved homeland. We, the sons of the Futuwwa camps, will confront you on every hill, in every valley, on every road.”
Hamdi Shaqura, deputy director of program affairs at the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, a Gaza-based watchdog, said that his organization issued no statement on the training.
“To the best of my knowledge no other organization in Gaza issued a statement either,” he told The Times of Israel.
Omar Dawabha, an eleventh-grader who took part in the training, was quoted on the website of Hamas’s interior ministry saying that “he learned how to safeguard our rights and principles.” Another student, Mohammed Abu Nar, addressed the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem at the graduation ceremony.
“We are the pioneers of liberation, we are coming to purify you from the Zionists,” he said.
Banner erected as a warning to Christians in the childhood hometown of Jesus. Photo Courtesy of: Israel Today
by, Staff | Israel Today | h/t Blazing CatFur
As Christians of every stripe in Jesus’ hometown of Nazareth begin to again take a real stand for their faith, local Muslims are warning them not to overstep the boundaries of their traditional place in the Middle East (hint: they must remain dhimmis, or second-class).
A large billboard hanging at a central point in Nazareth features a picture of an Israeli stop sign, along with the English translation of a verse from the Koran cautioning Christians (and Jews) to speak only the “truth” regarding Allah.
The poster (and Koran 4:171) reads:
“O people of the Scripture (Christians)! Do not exceed the limits of your religion. Say nothing but the truth about Allah (The One True God). The Christ Jesus, Son of Mary, was only a Messenger of God and His word conveyed to Mary and a spirit created by Him. So believe in God and His messengers and do not say: ‘Three gods (trinity)’. Cease! It will be better for you. Indeed, Allah is the One and the Only God. His Holiness is far above having a son.”
Evangelical Christians from Nazareth have become a growing and integral part of the overall Messianic body in the land, while traditional Christians (Catholics, Greek Orthodox, etc) have been waking up to their historical and religious connection to the Jews and are joining the Israeli army in ever greater numbers.
by, Maayana Miskin | Israel National News – Arutz Sheva 7
The government is planning to cede several sites in ancient Jerusalem to Muslim and Christian ownership, and Israel’s rabbis remain silent, Rabbi Yisrael Ariel has accused.
“There is a terrible plan, called the ‘holy basin,’ to split Jerusalem between Christians, Muslims and Jews,” Rabbi Ariel said, speaking to Arutz Sheva.
Rabbi Ariel, who heads the Temple Institute, continued, “The Christians will get the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and Mount Zion, the Muslims will get the Temple Mount, and we Jews will need to visit the Kotel (Western Wall) under the auspices of the Palestinian Authority.”
The Palestinian Authority (PA) denies the Jewish connection to the Western Wall, and PA TV has labeled Jewish worship at the holy site “sin and filth.”
Even if Jewish worship at the Kotel were to continue freely, the loss of access to the Temple Mount would be highly significant. The Temple Mount is the holiest site on earth according to Judaism, and is the place where the First Temple and Second Temple once stood.
Church of the Holy Sepulchre
The plan to split Jerusalem’s holy sites between various religions “has existed for some time, and now they’re going to implement it in stages,” Rabbi Ariel warned, adding, “During the Pope’s next visit they plan to transfer the Cenacle on Mount Zion to him, turning it into a pilgrimage site.”
He criticized Israel’s rabbis, including the Chief Rabbis, for their silence. “Not long ago they gave the Russian Compound to Russia, now the Christians are restoring a church – unused until now – on the Mount of Olives, and thus they slowly sell Jerusalem, and nobody raises their voice in protest,” he charged.
“Where is the Chief Rabbinate? They’re going to take the heart of Jerusalem and make it a Christian center,” he continued.
“Remember Rabbi Nissim. When the Pope came to visit fifty years ago, he insisted that if the Pope wanted to meet him he could come to his office in Jerusalem, he would not go greet him,” Rabbi Ariel recalled.
He accused his fellow rabbis of focusing on “price tag” vandalism of Arab property rather than the future of Jerusalem. “Three hundred rabbis spoke out against ‘price tag.’ Is this what you’ve found to get involved with, is this what pains you?
“Instead of meeting with the Prime Minister to protest the sale of Jerusalem, you’re speaking out against a handful of youths who burned a rug,” he accused.
The Muslim Waqf and PM Harper Security Guards. Photo Courtesy of: Arutz Sheva 7
by, Gil Ronen | Israel National News – Arutz Sheva 7
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper planned to tour the Temple Mount after visiting the Western Wall (Kotel) Tuesday, but the visit was torpedoed at the last minute by the Muslim Waqf, which said it would not allow Harper’s security detail onto the Mount, since some of the bodyguards are Jewish, leading Temple activist Yehuda Glick told Arutz Sheva in an exclusive interview. Bnei Brith Canada confirmed the story.
There are also alternative versions of the events, however, and it cannot yet be said with complete certainty which is the correct one.
הערבים מאיימים יהודים ומשטרה בהר הבית
Members of Harper’s entourage had made a preliminary tour of the Mount Sunday morning. The Waqf’s announcement that it would not allow the Jewish bodyguards in was made at the last moment, supposedly because the Waqf did not know earlier that some of the guards were Jewish.
Harper would not enter the Mount without the bodyguards and the visit was cancelled, according to a press statement by B’nai Brith Canada.
“It is a shame that the Prime Minister’s visit to the Kotel was marred after he learned that his security detail would not be allowed in to the Dome of the Rock because they are Jewish,” said Frank Dimant, CEO, B’nai Brith Canada. “B’nai Brith delegations have also faced moments of discrimination and harassment on previous missions. We have raised this issue with Canada’s Office of Religious Freedom. Equal access must be given to Jewish worshipers wishing to ascend the Temple Mount. This incident serves as a stark reminder of the religious discrimination going on at the hands of the Islamic Waqf responsible for administering the site.”
Glick, a prominent Temple activist and LIBA project coordinator, told Arutz Sheva Wednesday that he spoke to sources within Harper’s entourage who confirmed that the Waqf refused to allow Jewish bodyguards into the Mount.
On Sunday, Glick accompanied a former Canadian minister on a tour of the Temple Mount. Stockwell Day, who served as Canada’s Minister of Public Safety between 2006 and 2008, visited the Temple Mountfollowing a coincidental meeting with a resident of Jerusalem, Yosef Rabin, who regularly visits the Temple Mount compound.
An accompanying video shows Arabs – apparently fom the Waqf – shouting and employing a threatening tone as Glick and the Canadian group conducted the preliminary tour on Sunday.
Rabin said that his meeting with Day took place over Shabbat, when he visited friends for a Shabbat meal also attended by Day.
During the meal, Rabin told Arutz Sheva, he told the former Canadian minister about the situation on the Temple Mount where police, in an attempt to appease the Muslim Waqf which was left in charge of the compound after the 1967 Six Day War, ban Jews from praying or performing any other form of worship. Police sometimes close the Mount to Jews altogether in response to Muslim riots – for days or weeks at a time – despite evidence that such violence is usually planned in advance for the specific purpose of forcing Jews out.
“When I told Day about the situation on the Temple Mount, it pegged his interest and he asked me to arrange a visit for him,” said Rabin.
“This trip has been an amazing experience with the visit to the Kotel being one of the most touching,” said Eric Bissell, national president, B’nai Brith Canada. “As Prime Minister Harper approached the Western Wall, I could not help but think about how the Jewish people struggled for thousands of years for the freedom to pray at our holiest site. As a child survivor on the run during the nightmare of the Holocaust, this moment is more than I could ever have imagined or hoped to have been part of. To witness such support is a true miracle.”
by, Maayana Miskin | Israel National News – Arutz Sheva 7
Terrorist attacks nearly doubled in frequency in 2013, according to new data released by the IDF. There were 62 terrorist attacks in Judea and Samaria (Shomron) in 2013, compared to 35 the year before.
The IDF website quoted senior sources as saying that the violence is still nowhere near“Intifada” levels.
“There is a significant difference between [this and] the number of attacks during the Second Intifada. Then, the Central Command was dealing with several hundred attacks per year,” one explained.
A senior IDF officer in Judea and Samaria agreed. There has been a certain “heating up” in the region, he said, but “an Intifada means a popular uprising with a broad spectrum of high-impact incidents.”
“There have been disturbances and tension [in 2013], but if we look at what happened in the Second Intifada, it’s not even similar,” he continued, adding, “We don’t believe further escalation is expected in the near future.”
Previous data has shown a link between the frequency of attacks and the renewed Israel-PA negotiations.
More ‘lone wolf’ attacks, unplanned killing
Analysis of the 2013 attacks showed an increase in “lone wolf” attacks – those carried out by attackers with no formal connection to an organized terrorist group. Many such attackers were apparently influenced by personal crises.
There was also an increase in the number of attacks that began as non-violent crimes, and turned into murder or attempted murder of innocent civilians, simply because they were Israeli Jews. Among such attacks were the stabbing of a nine-year-old girl in Psagot and the murder of retiredIDF officer Shraya Ofer.
Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon has accused the Palestinian Authority of bearing some responsibility for such attacks, due to ongoing incitementwhich leads some to murder Jews with “unbearable ease.”
IDF sources noted that nearly all attackers have been arrested. “The recent string of solved cases proves that we are bringing those who try to attack us to justice,” one officer said. “We’ve arrested nearly everyone involved in the recent attacks, and we will bring the rest to justice as well.”
More armed battles in ‘camps’
The IDF data noted that in addition to the rise in terrorism, there has been an increase in the number of incidents in which soldiers faced violent opposition as they attempted to arrest wanted terrorists. Some incidents included gun battles in which attackers were killed and soldiers injured.
IDF officers noted that most such incidents took place inside “refugee camp” neighborhoods – areas populated by the descendants of Arabs who fled pre-state Israel in 1948. “In areas without employment or education, there’s more violence,” they explained.
Violence is most pronounced in areas where Palestinian Authority securityforces are not fully in control, they said. “There are some refugee camps with a very high potential for violence, but the security forces’ grip prevents outbursts,” an officer said.
He added, “In order to carry out an arrest, soldiers have to arrive when the suspect is at home, but also to avoid hurting the civilian population. The IDF’s freedom of activity in every place, at every time allows us to prevent an increase in terrorism.”
Israeli leaders are currently negotiating with the Palestinian Authority for a peace deal that would include the creation of a PA-led Arab state in much of Judea and Samaria. If such a state were established, the PA would take charge of security within its borders, while the IDF would withdraw.
UNESCO prior to the opening of 2013 General Conference in Paris, France. (Photo credit: AP/Benjamin Girette)
Days before opening of Paris exhibit, UN cultural body bows to pressure from Arab states, who said it would harm peace talks
by, Lazar Berman | The Times of Israel | h/t Blazing CatFur
Days before it was scheduled to open, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization cancelled an exhibit in Paris entitled, “The People, The Book, the Land: The 3,500-year relationship between the Jewish people and the land of Israel.
The exhibit, created by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, was co-sponsored by Israel, Canada, and Montenegro. SWC worked closely with UNESCO on the exhibit since 2011, when UNESCO accepted Palestine as a member state, the first UN body to do so.
UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova decided to cancel the event after Arab states in UNESCO protested, arguing it would harm the peace process. “We have a responsibility in ensuring that current efforts in this regard are not endangered,” Bokova wrote in a letter to the Wiesenthal Center.
The peace process is “at a delicate stage,” UNESCO’s Assistant Director-General Eric Fait wrote to the Wiesenthal Center on Tuesday, in a letter made available to The Times of Israel, “and UNESCO is keen to maintain an atmosphere conducive to the negotiations.” Therefore, wrote Fait, “we will have to postpone the exhibition to a later date.”
The event was scheduled to run from January 21 through January 30 at UNESCO’s Paris headquarters. It has been repeatedly delayed for the past two years, with organizers repeatedly bowing to UNESCO demands to make changes in the displays and literature at the event.
The Wiesenthal Center is slated to hold a press conference on Monday to discuss the cancellation.
Rabbi Marvin Hier, the Wiesenthal Center’s dean and founder, responded to Bokova in a letter expressing shock and dismay that the exhibition was being pulled. “We insist that you live up to your responsibilities and commitments as the co-organizer of this exhibition by overturning this naked political move that has no place in an institution whose mandate is defined by education, science, and culture — not politics,” Hier wrote in his letter, which was also made available to The Times of Israel. “Failure to do so would confirm to the world that UNESCO is the official address of the Arab narrative of the Middle East.”
Hier added, “Madame Director General, we have now reached a crucial moment in which you must decide what UNESCO is all about. If you allow the bullying of the Arab Group to derail the presentation of our historical, cultural, and non-political exhibition, then UNESCO will be sending an unmistakable signal to the American people and its elected representatives and to the Canadian people and its elected representatives that it has defaulted on its historic mandate and is now allowing itself to be hijacked by those with a vindictive political motivation.”
“Let’s be clear,” wrote Hier, “the Arab Group’s protest is not over any particular content in the exhibition, but rather the very idea of it – that the Jewish people did not come to the Holy Land only after the Nazi Holocaust, but trace their historical and cultural roots in that land for three and a half millennia. If anything will derail hopes for peace and reconciliation among the people of the Middle East, it will be by surrendering to the forces of extremism and torpedoing the opening of this exhibition — jointly vetted and co-organized by UNESCO and the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Madame Director General we hope you have the courage to do the right thing and we are still looking forward to cutting the ribbon on the exhibition with you next Monday night, January 20, at UNESCO headquarters.”
Hier sent copies of his letter to US President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and others.
Nimrod Barkan, Israel’s ambassador to UNESCO, said that the excuse to shelve the event was “mean and stupid,” according to Israel Radio
Abdulla al Neaimi, president of UNESCO’s Arab group, wrote in a letter to Bokova that the ”subject of this exhibition is highly political though the appearance of the title seems to be trivial. Most serious is the defense of this theme which is one of the reasons used by the opponents of peace within Israel. The publicity that will accompany… the exhibit can only cause damage to the peace negotiations presently occurring, and the constant effort of Secretary of State John Kerry, and the neutrality and objectivity of UNESCO.”
“For all these reasons, for the major worry not to damage UNESCO in its… mission of support for peace, the Arab group within UNESCO is asking you to make the decision to cancel this exhibition,” he concluded, according to Algemeiner.
Some UNESCO decisions have long rankled Israel’s supporters.
In 2012, UNESCO created a chair of Astronomy, Astrophysics and Space Sciences at the Islamic University of Gaza, which is closely linked with Hamas.
The US and Israel both stopped paying dues to the organization after it allowed the Palestinians in, and both countries lost their voting rights in November 2013. The suspension of US contributions, which accounted for $80 million a year — 22 percent of UNESCO’s overall budget — brought the agency to the brink of a financial crisis and forced it to cut or scale back American-led initiatives such as Holocaust education and tsunami research over the past two years.
UNESCO’s core mission, as conceived by the US, a co-founder of the agency in 1946, was to be an anti-extremist organization. Now, it seeks to tackle foreign policy issues such as access to clean water, teaches girls to read, works to eradicate poverty, promotes freedom of expression and works to give people skills to resist violent extremism.
by, Tova Dvorin and Ari Soffer | Israel National News – Arutz Sheva 7
Rabbi Yitzhak Cohen, whose son Neria Cohen was murdered in the Mercaz HaRav attack in 2008, was violently attacked by Arab youths as he visited his son’s grave on the Mount of Olives yesterday.
“Yesterday I went with my wife and children to my son’s gravesite,” the Rabbi recounted, in an interview with Arutz Sheva. “At the end of the road on Mount of Olives, I saw a group of Arab youths – they immediately began throwing stones at our car.”
“[Arab] youths have tried three separate times to hurt us along that road,” he continued. “I tried to travel in a zigzag pattern [to avoid them] and they were literally chasing after us.”
After trying in vain to avoid the rampaging mob, Rabbi Cohen found himself cornered. As rocks rained down on his car he realized he had littlechoice by to draw his weapon.
“I got out with a drawn pistol; it was a matter of time before I would use it. I stress that these were not children, but teenagers who were not afraid to launch rocks at commuters on a main road.”
“The Arab teenagers escalated this to the extreme, to the point where we almost came to live fire,” he noted.
Rabbi Cohen also had harsh words for the local police, who were conspicuously absent throughout the entire attack.
“There is also no doubt that the police are guilty of incompetence against Jerusalem and the State of Israel. It took those teenagers 40 minutes to get to us” without a police officer in sight.
Noting the potential lethality of hurling rocks and other projectiles at speeding vehicles, he expressed disbelief at the apparent lack of motivation by security forces to deal with the phenomenon of Arab rock-throwers.
“They need to understand that a rock could severely injure someone for life. Why isn’t this important to the State and the police?”
Noting the bitter irony of his particular experience, Rabbi Cohen lamented the “paradoxical situation, where a bereaved father cannot visit the gravesite of his son – who was killed in a terror attack – because of terrorists. It’s a terrible situation.”
The Rabbi places the responsibility squarely on the State’s shoulders. Clearly, he said, “the Prime Minister does not consider rock attacks on Israeli citizens important,” he stated. “The Mount of Olives is a holy place for the entire Jewish people, and we cannot allow this lawlessness to continue.”
Numerous rock-throwing attacks were launched against Jews visiting the Mount of Olives in September, who were praying at the historic site just before the Rosh Hashanah holiday. One New York family was attacked by rioting Arabs and eventually required hospitalization.
A Knesset committee hearing called in November to assess the situation on the Mount of Olives left little changed, ending with the decision not to assign more police to the site until the Defense Ministry could assess the full extent of the danger.