Study: Attack on Iran won’t work
Jul 17th
A new study by Professor Paul Rogers at the British think tank, Oxford Research Group, released on July 15, 2010 – has warned Israel and its Western allies that an Israeli military strike on Islamic Republic will not stop its nuclear program but “its consequences would be devastating and would lead to a long war”.
Paul Rogers said that US military action against Islamic Iran appeared unlikely but Israeli capabilities have increased.
Israeli daily Ha’aretz has quoted a poll conducted by TIPP, saying that 56% of American will support Israel taking military action against the Islamic Republic to stop its nuclear program, while 30% Americans opposed the war against Iran. Pew poll taken earlier showed 66% for attack on Iran while 24% against it. Last week ‘Israel-First’ Senator John McCain after meeting Israel Occupation Force (IOF) boss, Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi and Defence Mimister Ehud Barak, told the Washington Post that he did not believe Washington or Tel Aviv is considering military action against the Islamic Republic. Interestingly, Smith Research poll taken for the Jerusalem Post showed that 46% of Israeli Jews believe Ben Obama is “pro-Palestine”. America’s most powerful think tank, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) too had its Israeli stone to grind. Its Steven Simon predicted that the United States itself would probably embroiled militarily (in order to save its darling Israel) in any future Israel-Iran confrontation. Enough of these Israeli Hasbara polls, right!
It seems what is delaying USrael attacking the Islamic Iran is that most of pro-Israel studies have come to the following terrible conclusion:
“Iran would initially retaliate by lobbing ballistic missiles at Israel, while Tehran’s proxies Hezbollah and Hamas would bear most of the burden by launching corresponding rocket attacks from Gaza and Lebanon. Most predictions also include some Iranian attempt to wage economic warfare by sealing off the Strait of Hormuz to stop the flow of oil”.
In conclusion – the only alternative left for both the US and Israel is to continue working on regime change in Tehran via covert sabotage – yes, another ‘Green Revolution’.
Israel Vs Hizbullah
Jul 16th

The fighting ability of the US-armed Israeli soldiers can be judged by this small news item which was not reported by any of Zionist-controlled mass media. UPI reported on July 15, 2010 that nine Israeli soldiers accompanied by three tanks failed in their attempt to kidnap a 37-year-old Lebanese shepard from an area inside the so-called ‘Blue Line’. The shepard made escape to a joint checkpoint secured by UN peacekeepers (UNIFIL) and Lebanese army. A joint team of UNIFIL and Lebanese army has been set-up to investigate the incident.
After being humiliated twice by Hizbullah freedom-fighters (2000 and 2006) – Israel is getting prepared to combat with a new Lebanese adversary. Two commercial ships, Mariam and Julia, sailing from Lebanese port. Mariam will carry a large contingent of women from different lands including Nuns and medical supplies. Julia is to carry construction materials. The Israeli government’s knee-jerk reaction was reported by the Jerusalem Post: “The government of Israel has “linked the boat to Hizbullah,” that Yasser Kashlak, Director of the Free Palestine Movement, is “a fervent Hizbullah supporter,” that the true intentions of the organizers “remain dubious,” that the possibility exists that “terrorists or arms will be smuggled on board,” that Lebanon is an enemy country and must be treated “as if they were hostile,” that these boats “which are carrying representatives of Hizbullah and Iran” mean that Israel “reserves its rights under international law to use all necessary means to prevent these ships from violating the existing naval blockade” and that the presence of Samar Haji, the wife of a former Lebanese General “jailed for his part in the assassination of PM Rafiq Harari, “means a real connection with Hizbullah. None of the above is substantiated, none of it belies the true intention of the people who left their homes to participate in a direct act of civil disobedience against the state of Israel which is supported by their representatives in the Congress, and none of it provides either the U.S. or Israel with legal justification for preemptive strikes against a flotilla in international waters.
Israeli government has threaten to stop all ships carrying humanitarian aid for 1.5 million Gaza residents.
Amir Adl el-Kader – An Algerian Hero
Jul 15th
During his lifetime, Abd el-Kader, tribal leader and scholar of the Qur’an, became world-famous as both a freedom-fighter and an advocate for religious tolerance and cultural openness. President Abraham Lincoln thanked him for saving lives. French priests praised him from their pulpits. British readers admired him as they read his autobiography. And Algerians today regard him as a founder of modern Algeria and a symbol of its future. This May, the people of Elkader, Iowa (population less than 1400)—the only town in the United States named after an Arab—invoked his legacy when Algeria’s ambassador to the us helped school officials honor the teenage winner of the town’s high-school essay contest on the topic of religious understanding.
One might say that the beginning of this odd conjunction came on May 25, 1830, when the Ottoman governor of Algiers slapped the French consul with a flyswatter in an argument over unpaid bills. Soon after, the largest French navy since Napoleon’s campaign in Egypt was setting sail for Algeria to begin France’s ill-fated 130-year colonial occupation.
Abd el-Kader was at the time a 22-year-old student on a sort of Grand Tour pilgrimage to Makkah, a two-year sojourn that included visits in Cairo, Damascus and Baghdad. He traveled in the company of his father, leader of the Hashim tribe, whose territory was centered in western Algeria near the town of Mascara. By the time Abd el-Kader returned home in 1832, the French army was marching into the Algerian interior, and, with his father’s blessing, Abd el-Kader took up leadership of what became a 15-year intertribal campaign for independence. His leadership united most of Algeria’s tribes into what became the beginning of the modern state. For this, his tribesmen called him amir al-mu‘minin—literally “Prince of the Faithful.”
Although Abd el-Kader’s military resistance failed, he won fame for his principled tenacity, and he went on to gain worldwide respect as an interlocutor between Islam and Christianity. He also befriended westerners who similarly worked to bridge gaps between East and West, including the Arabist Wilfrid Scawen Blunt and the builder of the Suez Canal, Ferdinand de Lesseps. Like them, Abd el-Kader believed that Christians and Muslims were not fated to remain always at odds, refighting the Crusades in the modern age. His spiritual writings and correspondence with Catholics sought common understanding with other monotheisms. As he wrote in 1849, “If Christians and Muslims had paid me any attention, I would have put an end to their quarrels. They would have become brothers, inside as well as out.”
Among his own people, he was just as successful in mediating tribal rivalries between Arabs and Berbers. (He claimed descent from the Berber Bani Ifran tribe as well as from the Prophet Muhammad.) In the Levant, he became a peacemaker among Muslims, Christians and Druze. During religious riots in 1860, he helped save some 12,000 Syrian Maronite Catholics, a heroic feat that prompted President Lincoln’s letter of thanks. By the time he died in Damascus in 1883, 53 years to the day after the French set sail for Algeria, even American farmers in Iowa admired his story enough to name a town for him.
Today, in a similar time of strife, the amir is not forgotten. Prince Hassan bin Talal of Jordan has written that Abd el-Kader’s concept of “true jihad,” an inner struggle to remain true to one’s religion, “provides Muslims with a much-needed antidote to the toxic false jihads of today, dominated by anger, violence and politics.”
The former archbishop of Algiers, Monseigneur Henri Teissier, stated that the example of Abd el-Kader’s good relations with French Catholic priests “gives us an alternative response—that even amid the most violent confrontations, one must always work for peace.”
Osama Abi-Mershed, who teaches North African history at Georgetown University in Washington, DC, notes that while older Algerians regard Abd el-Kader as the political founder of their nation, younger Algerians also see him as someone who sought out commonalities with Europeans rather than differences—thus a modern man like themselves.
During the years of resistance, from 1832 until his surrender in 1847, Abd el-Kader earned a reputation for treating his French hostages well, often feeding them better than he fed his own troops, and for releasing them if food became insufficient. His willingness to negotiate exchanges for his own men captured by the French became, for him, an opportunity to engage in dialogue with Catholic clergymen. (He negotiated with clergy because the French recognized only his religious role, not his political one.)
In 1841, the bishop of Algiers, Antoine-Adolphe Dupuch, wrote to Abd el-Kader asking him to free a French prisoner: “You do not know me, but my calling is to serve God and to love all men as His children and as my brothers…. I have neither money nor gold and can offer in return only the prayers of a sincere soul.” He ended with the Biblical quotation, “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.”
The amir responded with a stroke of spiritual one-upmanship by citing another Christian precept: “You should have asked me not for the freedom of only one, but of all the Christians who are imprisoned. Further, would you not have been twice as worthy of your mission had you asked not only for the liberation of two or three hundred Christians, but also offered to extend the same favor to an equal number of Muslims who languish in your prisons? It is written, ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’”
Thus an exchange was arranged. Dupuch’s vicar, Abbé Suchet, went behind enemy lines to carry out the exchange, and he provided the French one of their first eyewitness descriptions of the amir. “The redoubted chief was dressed as a simple sheikh,” he wrote, “in an ordinary haik, a white burnoose, and a cord of camelhair passed round his head. At the slightest mention of religion, his eyes fall, and then are raised gravely towards heaven in the manner of one inspired.” The two discussed the role of the Catholic clergy, and Abd el-Kader agreed that future French prisoners would have access to visiting priests.
But there was no time to put such moderation into action. The new governor-general of Algiers, General Thomas-Robert Bugeaud, notorious for his indiscriminate warfare against men, women and children alike, launched a ferocious campaign to crush Abd el-Kader’s resistance. By 1843 Abd el-Kader was forced to seek asylum in Morocco, and in 1847 he conceded defeat to the French.
Following Abd el-Kader’s surrender, the French broke their promise of exile in another Arab country and instead imprisoned him and his retinue for five years, during which he occasionally received close friends like Bishop Dupuch and Eugène Daumas, a former consul in Algeria, whose 1853 book Horses of the Sahara included the amir’s own chapter on Arab equestrianism.
In that chapter, Abd el-Kader indulged in a favorite topic, reciting such hoary Arabic proverbs as “Horses are birds without wings,” “For the horse, nothing is far away,” and “He who forgets the beauty of horses for women will not prosper.” It also appears that the amir’s legendary stamina in the saddle prompted him unwittingly to mislead his readers, as when he said that the distance a good horse could travel in a single day was one hundred miles, equal to the journey between Mascara and Tlemcen. That was a distance that he could ride in a day, but few others.
Despite their merciless military tactics, the French in these years expressed a romantic, orientalist fascination with their Algerian adversary. Painters Horace Vernet and Stanislas Chelowski captured Abd el-Kader’s likeness in war and at rest. Fictionalized accounts like The Prisoners of Abd el-Kader, or Five Months of Captivity among the Arabs, written in French by Ernest Alby and translated into English by the Arabist Lucie Duff Gordon, played on the usual clichés of beheadings, treachery and ravished women. The British novelist William Makepeace Thackeray’s 1848 poem “Abd el-Kader at Toulon, or the Caged Hawk” followed a nobler line, beginning, “No more, thou lithe and long-winged hawk, of desert life for thee / No more across the sultry sands shalt thou go swooping free.”
These were also the years that Abd el-Kader began deepening his study of Islam in particular and of spirituality in general. He wrote both Reminder for the Intelligent, Advice for the Indifferent, an investigation into the common beliefs of Christians and Muslims, as well as Kitab al Mawaqif, or The Book of Stopping Places, an esoteric study in the tradition of the 10th-century philosopher and mystic Ibn Arabi, whom Abd el-Kader further honored by preparing a new edition of Ibn Arabi’s The Illuminations of Makkah.
Following his release from prison in France in 1852, Abd el-Kader moved first to Bursa, Turkey, and then to Damascus, where he joined some 500 fellow Algerian exiles. There he made the acquaintance of such English women and men as Lady Jane Digby, who had married a Syrian shaykh, and British consul Richard Burton.
His fame as a Muslim whose aegis extended to people of other beliefs was cemented by his actions in May 1860 in Syria, when Druze and Maronite Christian factions disagreed over enforcement of an Ottoman law, passed under western pressure, that set Muslims and non-Muslims on equal footing before military recruiters and tax collectors. Tensions escalated, and Druze began riots in Mount Lebanon, which the Ottoman rulers of Syria did nothing to stop.
As the violence spread, threatening the lives of Maronite Christians, Abd el-Kader wrote a letter to Druze elders warning that “such proceedings are unworthy of your community,” but he soon realized that only a show of force would be effective. When rioting reached Damascus on July 9, Abd el-Kader rebuffed the Ottoman governor’s request to disarm his men, and instead sent them into the city’s Christian quarters to escort residents to his own guarded precinct. When that overflowed, he pressed the governor to open the citadel to them, with safe passage guaranteed by his men. It is estimated that as many as 12,000 lives were thus saved.
As Mikhail Mishaqa, then serving as the us consul in Damascus, remembered in his memoirs, translated into English under the title Murder, Mayhem, Pillage and Plunder, “this outstanding man, whose excellence was well known to the kings and inhabitants of this earth, never rested a moment in his attempts to allay the revolt. There was not a single leader of the city, ulema, or agha, warning them against revolt, of its impermissibility in the Islamic religion, except for him.”
After the riots, Abd el-Kader wrote in response to a letter of thanks from the new bishop of Algiers, “What I did for the Christians, I did because of my faith as a Muslim…. All religions brought to us by the prophets, from Adam until Muhammad, rest on two principles—praise for God and compassion for all His creatures. Outside of this, there are only unimportant differences.”
Judeo-Christians – The real ‘anti-Semites’
Jul 14th

New York’s oldest Jewish daily, Forward, published an article by Donald Snyder, under the title “For Jews, Swedidh City is ‘place to move away from’, on July 7, 2010. In the article the writer says that with the incrase of Muslim population (local converts and immigrants), the cases of ‘anti-Semitism’ is on the rise in Sweden and the rest of European countries.
Before, answering this Zionist propaganda crap – I would like to cite some past events in the European history.
1. Jews were not allowed to reside in Sweden until after 1782 CE. Until then there was no Muslim community in Sweden. The first Muslim community in Sweden was reportedly established in 1950s.
2. The expulsion of Jewish communities took place almost in every European country in the past. For example, Albrecht forced V forced Jewish communities to leave Austria in 1420; in Bavaria Jews were banned in 1551; in 1370 Jews were expunged in Belgium; in 1290 King Edward expelled Jews from England and they were allowed to return in 1655; in 1588, Queen of Hungary, Maria Theresa banned Jews, In 1492, 100,000 Jews were expelled from Sicily. Jews were exscinded from Sardinia and Naples in 1540; from Venice and Genoa in 1550. In 1553 Rome, any copies of the Talmud were burned. In 1569, and again in 1593, Jews were expelled from Italy. From 1846-1878, in the Vatican State, Pope Pius IX enforced former restrictions against the Jews. Similar expulsions were carried out in Germany (1012), France (1182), Lithuania (1495), Netherlands (1444), Norway (until 1814), Poland (1453), Potugal (1498), Russia (1510), Slovakia (1380) and the list goes on. Most of these European countries had no Muslim population at the time of Jewish expulsion.
The Jewish expulsion from the Christian world was not solely based on religious hatred but Jewish elites involvement in anti-social activities, such as White slavery, racism and ursury.
3. Jewish genocides were carried out Christians in Spain (1492-99) and Germany (1940s). Jews, on the other hand killed 1.7 million German Christians after the D-Day and over 60-100 million Christians in Russia and Ukraine under Lenin and Stalin dictatorships.
4. Jewish Bible (OT), Christian Bible (NT) and Talmud contain more anti-Semitic verses than Holy Qur’an.
5. Any reader of Zionist literature cannot help but conclude that the Zionist Jews hated their fellow Jews more than the non-Jews. One has to study Theodor Herzl, Chaim Weizmann (Israel’s first president), Israel Joshua Singer, Klatzkin, Pinsker, Yehezkel Kaufman, Frishman, Berdichevsky, Lenni Brenner, A.D. Gordon, Schawadron and Chaim Kaplan to name a few. Herzl declared that “the anti-Semitism will be our most dependable friends, the anti-Semite countries, our allies”. Chaim Kaplan, who kept a diary during the Warsaw ghetto uprising, wrote: “Every nation, in its time of misfortune, has conspirators who do their work in scret. In our case an entire nation has been raised on conspiracy. With others the conspiracy is political; with us it is religious and national”.
Former Israeli minister Shulamit Aloni told Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!): “It’s a trick, we always use it – When someone criticizes Israel in Europe, we bring in Holocaust – and when someone criticizes Israel in the US, we bring in anti-Semiticism”.
Muslims are on record of liberating Jews in Jerusalem (638), Spain (711), Palestine (1186) and Europe (1940s). In June 2005, Israeli mole, Abraham Foxman, national director of ADL, honored Turkish Prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan for Turkey’s saving 100,000 European Jews.
In January 2008, Rabbi Haim Ovadia proudly declared”I am a Jew of Islam because Judaism under the rule of Crescent took a different course than that under the rule of Cross. The Jew of Islam, although decreed by the Pact of Omar as dhimmis, or second class citizens, never experienced the same level of hatred, anti-Semitism and persecution which were their daily bread in Christendom. They were not demonized as god killers and did not have to defend their religion in public disputations. They were not expelled en-mass on religious grounds from a Muslim country as they were from England, France and Catholic Spain….”
Last year, Bielefeld University released its research Report, which concluded:
One-quarter of Europeans believe that “Jews have too much influence“
31% agree that “Jews in general do not care about anything or anyone but their own kind.”
45.7% of the Europeans somewhat or strongly agree that “Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians.”
About 37.4% agree with the following statement: “Considering Israel’s policy, I can understand why people do not like Jews.”
The word ‘anti-Semitism’ has Western roots. It never existed among Muslim communities, who have more Semitic blood than the great majority of current Jewish people, who are Khazarian turks and African Berbers. The feeling of anti-Jewishness arose among the Muslim societies after the European Jews started flooding Palestine after WW I. The Zionist agents terrorized the Jewish communities in the Arab countries by targetting Synagouges and Jewish businesses. As result, most of Arab Jews migrated to Israel.
Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun, once wrote: “the most destructive impact of this new Jewish Political Correctness is on American foreign policy debates. We at Tikkun have been involved in trying to create a liberal alternative to AIPAC and the other Israel-can-do-no-wrong voices in American politics. When we talk to Congressional representatives who are liberal or even extremely progressive on every other issue, they tell us privately that they are afraid to speak out about the way Israeli policies are destructive to the best interests of the United States or the best interests of world peace – lest they too be labeled anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. If it can happen to Jimmy Carter, some of them told me recently, a man with impeccable moral credentials, then no one is really politically safe”.
Israel in not a ‘normal country’
Jul 13th

On July 12, Canada’s second largest circulation daily, The Globe And Mail, published an Israeli Hasbara (propaganda) article by US professor Ian Buruma (Bard College, N.Y.) under the heading ‘Is Israel a normal country?’ Ian Buruma’s adoration of Ayaan Hirsi Ali in “Against Submission”, published on March 4, 2007 in the New York Times – showed his ‘Islamophobe’ nature.
In this article, Ian Buruma, in order to cover the over sixty years of European Jew occupation of an Arab country, the on-going genocide of the natives and the neigboring Arab people since 1948, Israel’s wars on all its neighboring countries and occupation for the creation of the Eretz Israel (Greater Israel), a demographic Jewish entity – he calls Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s, reaction to Israeli commandos attack on the unarmed Gaza Freedom Flotilla, killing nine Turkish aid workers, on May 31 – as “hysterical”.
Ian Buruma also defends Israeli leaders, most of whom are likely to be arrested as war-criminals in several Western countries, by comparing them to the Syrian dictator, Hafez al-Assad (1930-2000) for carrying out the massacre of 20,000 people in the city of Hama, a stronghold of Muslim Brotherhood, in 1982. However, the con-man ignored to mention that in the same year – it was Hafez al-Assad’s truce with Israel, which paved the way for Israeli siege of Beirut, during which an estimated 18,000 people were killed and 30,000 injured. The Zionist regime demanded the expulsion of the PLO from Lebanon as price for lifting the siege, and then stood by while their trained and funded Christian Phalangist allies massacred 3000-3500 Palestinian Muslim and christian refugees in Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
John Chuckman, a Canadian free-lance writer and retired chief economist for Texaco, wrote an interesting response to Ian Buruma’s apologetic rant:
While I’m the last to defend dictators, this is a completely unsubstantiated claim of what happened in Syria. Perhaps worse, the assertion about Israel is just false. Israel’s first invasion of Lebanon was just about that bloody.
And what of the achievements of the Six Day War, a war deliberately calculated by Israel’s establishment to win the land of the self-defined Greater Israel – all the Palestinian territories plus slices of Syria and Lebanon – it had failed to grab at its founding?
Israel went so far as to attack ruthlessly an American intelligence ship to suppress information of General Dayan’s movements of armor, the general’s purpose being the quick seizure of all the lands Israel desired and then presenting the world with a fait accompli.
And how do you reckon the toll of misery of decade after decade of hundreds of thousands of refugees plus the forty-plus years of truly abusive occupation?
I could continue, for unquestionably the invasion of Iraq was about and for Israel’s benefit. That’s million people killed and a couple of million refugees, refugees taken, in large part, by poor Syria.
“So is it true, as many defenders of Israel claim, that the Jewish state is judged by different standards from other countries? I believe it is.”
This completely ignores the fact of Israel’s establishment constantly claiming that is the only democracy and representative of human rights in its part of the world.
If you claim one standard but behave by another – truly indistinguishable from the region’s dictators – I do think the world is entitled to comment. Israel holds ten thousand illegal prisoners, imposes a ghastly blockade for over three years, imposes countless checkpoints on people’s ordinary lives in the West Bank, regularly assassinates those with whom it disagrees, and uses every underhanded technical gimmick it can think of to keep stealing other people’s land.
Indeed, it could be well argued that the kind of Israel we see has effectively retarded the development of democracy in the Arab world. Israel’s cooperative friend Mubarak, a dictator of thirty years, is supported by everything the United States can think of, suppressing all genuine democratic movements. For a long time, it was the same with Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Opposing Israel’s excesses has provided a rallying cry for every dictator in the region. At the same time, the United States and Israel would prefer these populations suppressed by dictators who in private mind their own business or are even rather cooperative, a la Mubarak.
“That all Jews, including Israeli Jews, should remain haunted by a horrible past is understandable. But it must never be used to justify aggression against others.”
But that is precisely what Israel’s establishment and its army of apologists abroad do, day and night. It is, if you will, a ghastly form of special pleading.
“There are other reasons, however, for the double standard directed at Israel. One is what the liberal Israeli philosopher and peace activist Avishai Margalit has called “moral racism.” The bloodlust of an African or Asian people is not taken as seriously that of a European – or other white – people.”
But isn’t that exactly what happens inside Israel? Day in and out in countless ways, Sephardic Jews are not treated with the same respect and regard as Ashkenazi Jews. And the poor small lot of dark-skinned African Jews are treated with palpable contempt. The world should have higher standards than Israel itself in these matters?
“…the legacy of colonialism works against Israel in another way, too.”
Oh please, this is tiresome old idea to trot out. Besides, in the eyes of most Arabs, Israel is itself an example of colonialism. Here is a tiny enclave – truly a garrison state – living in the midst of many tens of millions of people for whose cultures and aspirations it has absolutely no understanding or sympathy. You could draw a parallel to Israel’s position today with that of European Crusaders who built massive forts in the Middle East at places like Acre.
In the end, if Israel expects to be treated as a normal country, it must behave like one.
Surely, most people, including likely most Jews, know Israel has yet to behave as anything resembling a normal country.
Recent Comments