Touch Of Evil

 

Oh well, since we are in full swing, we might as well continue with the conspiracies. But don't be fooled; the spreading of these seemingly idiotic conspiracy theories are serving a much bigger purpose, you could say, the mother of all conspiracies. But more of that later:

United States churches are secretly run by Jews who converted to Christianity with the intention of controlling religious Americans including President Bush, a top Hamas official claims.

"Even the churches where the Americans pray are led by Jews who were converted to Christianity, but they were converted to keep controlling the Americans," Mohammad Abu Tir, the number two Hamas terrorist in the newly formed Palestinian Authority government said during an exclusive interview from his home yesterday with top radio host Rusty Humphries and WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein.

"I made a study and I know very well that all this radicalism in some parts of the Christianity, [including] the Anglicans who are being led by Bush, is because of the control of Zionists," said Abu Tir.

The Hamas official, famous for his orange-dyed beard, went on to accuse "Zionists" of controlling Western media organizations and "leading terrorism inside the mass communications media."

Abu Tir was elected to the number two spot in the PA in January's legislative ballots in which Hamas won by a large margin. He spent nearly 25 years in Israeli prisons for directing terror activities, including the attempted poisoning in the early 1990s of Israel's water supplies. [...]

Abu Tir's comments were broadcast Wednesday on Humphries national program, "The Rusty Humphries Show," and featured on more than 230 radio stations nationwide.

Think about this for a moment. Why would the No. 2 In charge chose to talk about this seemingly ridiculous variation of the global Jewish conspiracy quatsch instead of using this rather unique opportunity to address a large portion of the US population to shore up sympathy for the Palestinian people and Hamas' financial crisis?

You will find the answer in (a) the content of the recent publication by Professor John J. Mearsheimer and Dean Stephen Walt, entitled "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy", which I covered in my post "The Israel Lobby" A Perfect Excuse For Anti-Semitism, and (b) the vociferous opposition to the Bush Administration in combination with its equally vilified evangelical ties.

In this context, this initially crazy sounding rant quickly takes on a whole new dimension. What emerges is a deceitful maneuver to shore up support for what is of far greater importance to Hamas: Sowing the seeds of Antisemitism carefully embedded in the widespread rejection of both the religious right as well as the hatred for President Bush and his Administration.

In order to survive financially whilst maintain its sole raison d'être, namely the destruction of the State of Israel and the murder of every single Jew on Arab land for starters, Hamas must use every opportunity to increase suspicion against the Jews in general and the State of Israel in particular, if any of its perfidious overtures are to achieve its objective to loosen the purse strings.

The "Two-State" sham and their inability to get their story straight following the decision of the EU to freeze aid to the Palestinian government, further illustrates not only Hamas' categorical refusal to moderate its genocidal doctrine, but more so, reveals Hamas' internal struggle to reach consensus to what extend mere lip service, indicating any deviation from its holy mission, remains within bounds;  that such empty gestures neither compromise nor violate their covenant enshrined in their charter.

The contradictory statements came as Hamas is under intense international pressure to moderate its views, including recognizing Israel, renouncing violence and accepting existing peace agreements. In Brussels, Belgium, the EU announced Friday it would cut off direct aid payments to the Hamas-led government.

The idea of accepting a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an apparent attempt by Hamas to appease the international community, without having to state directly that it is recognizing Israel.

Mark Regev, spokesman of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, cuts through the chase and exposes Hamas' not quite yet coordinated, but nevertheless indicative attempts to pull wool over donor nations' eyes: "In this letter, the Palestinian foreign minister talks about cooperation and peace in the region, but unfortunately he talks of the region without Israel".

In order to keep a clear head, we must again and again read Hamas' Charter and refresh our memory why it is imperative for us to take Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood and Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad seriously, why we must believe their resolve and why they will never renounce any of these core doctrines:

THE COVENANT OF THE HAMAS - MAIN POINTS

The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement was issued on  August 18, 1988. The Islamic Resistance Movement, also known as the HAMAS, is an extremist fundamentalist Islamic organization operating in the territories under Israeli control. Its Covenant is a comprehensive manifesto comprised of 36 separate articles, all of which promote the basic HAMAS goal of destroying the State of Israel through Jihad (Islamic Holy War). The following are excerpts of the HAMAS Covenant:

Goals of the HAMAS:

'The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.' (Article 6)

On the Destruction of Israel:

'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble)

The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area:

'The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it.' (Article 11)

'Palestine is an Islamic land... Since this is the case, the Liberation of Palestine is an individual duty for every Moslem wherever he may be.' (Article 13)

The Call to Jihad:

'The day the enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In the face of the Jews' usurpation, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.' (Article 15)

'Ranks will close, fighters joining other fighters, and masses everywhere in the Islamic world will come forward in response to the call of duty, loudly proclaiming: 'Hail to Jihad!'. This cry will reach the heavens and will go on being resounded until liberation is achieved, the invaders vanquished and Allah's victory comes about.' (Article 33)

Rejection of a Negotiated Peace Settlement:

'[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement... Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the as arbitrators in the lands of Islam... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.' (Article 13)

Condemnation of the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty:

'Egypt was, to a great extent, removed from the circle of struggle [against Zionism] through the treacherous Camp David Agreement. The Zionists are trying to draw other Arab countries into similar  agreements in order to bring them outside the circle of struggle. ...Leaving the circle of struggle against Zionism is high treason, and cursed be he who perpetrates such an act.' (Article 32)

Anti-Semitic Incitement:

'The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.' (Article 7)

'The enemies have been scheming for a long time... and have accumulated huge and influential material wealth. With their money, they took control of the world media... With their money they stirred  revolutions in various parts of the globe... They stood behind the French Revolution, the Communist Revolution and most of the revolutions we hear about... With their money they formed secret organizations - such as the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs and the Lions - which are spreading around the world, in order to destroy societies and carry out Zionist interests... They stood behind World War I  ... and formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains... There is no war going on anywhere without  them  having their finger in it.' (Article 22)

'Zionism scheming has no end, and after Palestine, they will covet expansion from the Nile to the Euphrates River. When they have finished digesting the area on which they have laid their hand, they  will look forward to more expansion. Their scheme has been laid out in the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion'.' (Article 32)

'The HAMAS regards itself the spearhead and the vanguard of the circle of struggle against World Zionism... Islamic groups all over the Arab world should also do the same, since they are best equipped for their future role in the fight against the warmongering Jews.' (Article 32).

David G. Littman concludes his excellent summary "The Genocidal Hamas Charter" by reminding us that there can be no peace as long as Hamas has any say or influence. Little did he know three and a half years ago, that the PLO not only failed to marginalize Hamas, but that Hamas in fact took over the reigns of government, pushing PLO out of their way.

Unlike speeches and newspaper articles, which may change with the winds, a written charter is an essential, binding document. Hitler understood this when he wrote in the preface to Mein Kampf ("My Struggle"): "The unity and uniformity of a doctrine can only be safeguarded if it has been fixed forever in a written text." After his release from an Israeli prison and return to Gaza in October 1997, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder and spiritual head of Hamas, declared that Israel must "disappear from the map." He added: "We have an aim and an enemy, and we shall continue our jihad against the enemy. A nation without a jihad is a nation without a purpose." The root meaning of jihad means "struggle." [...]

In December 1998, in the presence of President Clinton (who came to Gaza to attend the event), the PLO's national charter was amended at a special session of its national congress. Should the Palestinian Authority continue its alliance with Hamas — and if Hamas refuses to scrap its genocidal charter and renounce the ideology of jihad-war — there can be no possibility of serious progress toward a Middle East peace, with two states coexisting side by side.

There are voices of reason in the Middle East working for secular goals to be achieved through compromise and cooperation. It will be hard enough to strive for the creation of stable, democratic states in the Middle East even without widespread conspiracy theories and the Hamas genocidal charter — a charter denounced neither by Muslim spiritual and political leaders nor by the United Nations.

How times have changed for the worse. The legacy of the late Sheikh Ahmed Yassin is bearing fruit:

But while it was the duty of Muslims to wage a jihad to liberate Palestine in its entirety, that time was not yet. For the foreseeable future, Yassin believed, the struggle was cultural, moral and educational; it was about combating secularism and the reform and re-Islamicisation of Palestinian society - a preparation for jihad, rather than jihad itself.

Meanwhile, instead of global condemnation, Hamas not only pockets the EU bail-out package of some 120 million euros in March, but proceeds to threaten the EU "that cutting aid would harm its credibility and may lead to boycotts of European interests in the Islamic world"; Denmark style, no doubt...

In the end, any calls for moderation is nothing but a tiresome, boring old broken record:

Palestinian Deputy Prime Minister Naser al-Shaer said if the EU wanted Hamas to change its stance, it should negotiate with the new government and not just repeat a "broken record" about the three principles.

"If they want something, they have to negotiate with us, talk to us," he said.

It never ceases to amaze me how we in the West insist on dismissing years and years of relentless and unabated repetition of Hamas' and Islamic doctrine, enshrined in every charter, acted upon thousands of times, confirming with each and every ultimate sacrifice the complete and total devotion of its followers. Yet, when any of these murdering barbarians so much as mumble anything remotely suggesting a 'change of heart', we jump at it and bend over backwards to declare progress. Even if everyone is clearly aware, that its sole purpose is to open the purse strings; even when such mutterings are uttered through gritted teeth, with crossed fingers, and afterwards swiftly denied.

Why is it so hard for us to accept, that it is unthinkable for Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood or Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad to change their core 'values and beliefs', that every concession will always only be temporary window dressing so as to buy time on their path to glory?

Linked to Stop The ACLU, Third World County, Blue Star Chronicles, Mudville Gazette

Comments

[PapaBear]

Consider that in the Islamic world, the way to get status is to be a warrior or a Qu'ranic authority

The Islamic world's "Golden Age" coincided with their period of expansion-by-conquest into established civilizations, into the Byzantine Empire, Persia, India, etc. With that expansion came a steady inflow of loot and slaves who knew how to run a civilization. When that inflow terminated, so did the "Golden Age".

[epaminondas]

When Tycho Brahe was farting around with his telescopes he was communicating with a fellow researcher in Istanbul. They were about the same place, theoretically. The year that Brahe published, the ulema in Istanbul decided that such research was "incorrect", and the observatory was razed to the ground.

Two generations after he died, the muslims were obliterated at Vienna.

Religion can have no place in man's need to know.

[gringoman]

Good analysis. The "Medieval Question", of course, is central. Why did the West come out of the Middle Ages, while Islam sank back in (assuming it's "glory period," in its early centuries, when it conquered almost half the known world and even preserved much of Greco-Roman learning, as seen in the great Andalusian-Arab philosopher and physician Averroes, was not itself deeply rooted in the dark ages)? And why, today, despite the "moderates" and the Johhny-Walker drinkers who Republicans (Dems too) schmooze and cut business deals with in Washington, does this religion seem so tied down to the past? Why does little Israel seem to produce more inventors and Nobel-caliber types in the sciences or mathematics etc than the entire muslim world? Why does the "luck of the draw" with oil funds (of which jihadis have always known how to get "their cut" from the "moderates,")seem, to some, the reason why Islam still even survives as a big world religion? The writer below looks into these matters. I don't necessarily agree with him in toto. He claims that, ironically, the muslims stayed mired because they were more "spiritual" than the Europeans, especially northern Europeans. Also, the Arabs absorbed Greek thought before Europeans did, yet Europeans,ironically, unlike the muslims, used this knowledge for a "renaissance." I think this guy is begging some questions here. The Romans, after all, had assimilated Greek thought and culture centuries before there was an Islam, and it followed them all over the Roman Empire, just like their roads and aqueducts and temples, from Spain to France, North Africa, Egypt and the Middle East. (The Romans, of course, never let Greek metaphysics get in the way of the natural Roman inclination to act, to make, to build, to administer, to govern.) That said, the writer here explores an area that needs exploring, and probably won't be on CNN or the Evening News with Katie Couric.

Muslims discovered Greek thought hundreds of years before the Western Christians, yet it was the latter who ultimately assimilated it. Why did the reverse not happen? By tracing the major currents of medieval Islamic and Christian thought, this article, in part, proposes that the outcome had little to do with the virtues or vices of the tenets of either Islam or Christianity (they were both obstacles), but with older and deeper dispositions of mass belief. The Roman Christians (unlike the Byzantine Christians) lacked a significant spiritual-mystical dimension in the faith of their masses, unlike in the Islamic heartland, where such presence was strong. In particular, the latter led to Sufism, the dominant face of Islam until the 19th century (when orthodoxy began rising, partly in reaction to colonialism and modernism). Widespread mysticism thus indirectly denied critical mass to the early Islamic rationalism.

In the medieval West, on the other hand, there was hardly a mystical tradition; it had precious little of the non-denominational spirituality that seeks worldly detachment. As Protestant reinterpretation and Greek rationalism challenged their dogma-centric metaphysics, the temporal naturally gained wider emphasis, with its external engagement and human agency. It fostered popular attitudes and values similar to those of Classical Greece, which too had no spirituality. Notably, this took root in regions with relatively recent 'barbarian' pasts and poorer records of spiritual life – northwestern Europe. At the expense of Catholicism, these attitudes snowballed into the abstraction of individualism, ultimately leading to the scientific method and political institutions built via negotiation. Much of what followed sprang from an interplay of its internal logic and contingency.

In the Epilogue, I propose a different classification, from the clichéd east-west, of mankind's significant and seminal metaphysical responses down the ages. It would be no fun writing this just for the sake of polemics – I am ever mindful of the shortness of human life, and the obscurity of the theme – this article also discusses some of the key events and the lives & times of many remarkable personalities of early Islam: al-Beruni, Omar Khayyam, Firdausi, al-Farabi, Ibn al-Arabi, and Avicenna, besides others.

http://www.shunya.net/Text/Islam/Abstract.htm

[Patrick]

Since you bring up Rome, let us not forget the 3rd Punic War and as Cato the Elder always said: Carthago delenda est! (Carthage must be destroyed!)

For years he worked this demand into every oratory. It became a rallying cry for Rome. Eventually, the Romans acquiesced to this demand. It took three years to breach the walls, and another week of vicious street to street fighting to make it to the citadel, but in the end, Rome did what it said it would do. It tore down the walls of Carthage. It killed the men and sold the women and children into slavery. It ordered that no city would ever stand there again. I always heard they salted the fields, but newer investigations discount this.

So what is my point? Years of a people announcing their intentions. Those same people demonstrated their proclivity to do what they say. When the time was right and they had the excuse, they struck and fulfilled their promise. Ring a bell?

Did all of Rome desire to see the absolute destruction of Carthage? Did the Carthagenians believe the Romans would actually do it? The Carthagenians had a valid treaty, paid horrendous reparations, disbanded their war machine. Surely the Romans knew that Carthage was not a threat to them?

I know some are dismayed with this illustration. Different Romans had different reasons for the destruction of Carthage (philosopical, economical-killing the Romans in the olive trade, personal-memories of Hannibal,...). Different members of Islam have different reasons for acting the way they do. Just because your friend will not take part in the rape and sacking of the city, does not mean they will do more than voice a few objections and say it does not concern them. How many vehemently protest that what is happening is not Islam. Very Few. Most protest and say it is a poor interpretation, but do not deny the validity of militant Islam. I applaud those few who do risk their lives by issuing minor fahtwahs. But there is not struggle for the heart of islam. No recognized religious scholars who are trying to bring islam out of its slide into the dark ages.

Until there is a solid break, and a giving unto Ceasar...Oh wait, the Koran says you should not give unto Ceasar since there is only one true law Muslims should abide by. Tolerance, Peace, Submission...they all mean the same, right???

[gringoman]

What if the U.S. really were run by Zionists and gentiles who did their bidding---according to the Islamo-Fascismo playbook? All right, there might still be a Barbara Streisand Hollywood, changing the Arab terrorists in Clancy best-seller into Idaho neo-Nazis (got to think of the muslim and Eurabian box-office.) There might still be deracinated NBC yuppies searching for "anti-muslim feelings" at NASCAR.And maybe there would not be a warning that Abdullah's next big strike on USA means bye-bye Mecca-and-mullahs in a blinding flash (was it wise to make a 'Great Satan' really angry?) But if Zionists were calling the shots, would even the State Department be donating a single dinar to the poor needy spawn and electorate of murderous jihadis? After all, Zionists are not dumbkopfs about history. They would understand that jihadi barbarism began after Rome softened, weakened and declined, to the point where it could even see its own cowardice and inadequacy as self-congratulatory "compassion" and "diplomacy."

[Raimondo]

Very scary indeed. Our way of life, our cultural values and our children's future cannot be taken for granted.

In my own experience I saw what happened to the Catholic Cathedral in Mogadiscio Somalia, and to other churches and houses of worship in Somalia that were not Muslim. It's absolutely barbaric!

[epaminondas]

No one should harbor any doubt that for the 'arab' cause to succeed it's main ally must be racism.
It's amazing really. It's one of the reasons that I have felt for years that there is simply NOTHING to discuss. Having been one who faced the KKK nose to nose, I personally can't see a SINGLE difference. Yet I hear from my gulf friends, that, well, the 'jews are different, you are being made a dupe'. And the reason for this IS that which the muslim morons of Tamiyyoid lineage hold most dear, the founding document, and the Hadiths.
It is precisley those things taken as literal articles of faith which must be moved many miles before there is both a climate for DISCUSSION in the middle east, and a peace with the Islam of the salafi zarquoids (which thanks to the many God Bless Hitler, etc. signs IS Islam today)
When for 1600 years you teach your children the Hadith of the "Stone and the Tree", and 9:29, what can you expect? That they will lie down with the lambs?
When you teach for that long that the 'rightly guided Caliph Umar I says', "Do not appoint the jews and christians to public office because in their relgiion they are the people of bribes", or 3:118, call me stupid, but I imagine only one cultural result.

This is not only why there is nothing to discuss between the jewsish people in Israel and the Tamiyya-Qutb- Muslim-Brotherhood philosphical and religious bigots, but also why WE have little room for what they claim is peace as well.

Their victory, is the victory of Nathan Bedford Forrest's grand kleagles.