Category: Israel

A Contrast in Leadership: King Abdullah and President Obama

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

 

 

Some of us have short memories and some of us have long memories. This writer in particular will not ignore two noteworthy events that occurred in the last six months. Both of these events involved ISIS executing its hapless captives. Both of these events present two very different kinds of responses–as different as day and night.

President Obama took to the podium and said some appropriate remarks for the tragic death of the American journalist Tom Foley.

  • They declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people. So ISIL speaks for no religion. Their victims are overwhelmingly Muslim, and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. No just god would stand for what they did yesterday and what they do every single day. ISIL has no ideology of any value to human beings. Their ideology is bankrupt. They may claim out of expediency that they are at war with the United States or the West, but the fact is they terrorize their neighbors and offer them nothing but an endless slavery to their empty vision and the collapse of any definition of civilized behavior.[1]

What happened next proved to be more important than anything the President said at the podium.  In short, if a picture could tell a thousand words, the images that ensued within four minutes after the President’s speech could fill ten thousand volumes. Within four minutes after leaving the podium, Obama teed-off and could be seen laughing with friends and fist-bumping them during a five-hour round at Farm Neck Golf Course on Martha’s Vineyard  – his seventh 18-holes in ten days.

I cannot recall a president in recent memory who was so oblivious to the pain and shock that the entire nation felt, yet the game of golf had to go on! I can only imagine the European heads of states shaking their heads in disbelief. Putin and ISIS were probably laughing derisively at our President, who forgot about the “optics” of how he looked on camera.

Yes, Mr. Obama, we know why you detest the press.

After discovering how his popularity plummeted in the next several days, President Obama reluctantly admitted, “after the statement that I made, that you know, I should’ve anticipated the optics,” he said.

The second reaction was that of King Abdullah II of Jordan to  news that the Jordanian pilot Lt. Moath al-Kasasbeh, 27, had been burned alive while confined in a cage.

  • Jordan’s King Abdullah, himself a former general, angrily vowed to pursue ISIS until his military runs “out of fuel and bullets,” in a closed door meeting with U.S. lawmakers that followed the release Wednesday of a grisly video showing a captured Jordanian airman being burned alive in a cage by the terrorist army.[2]

Such resolve, such courage! Who would expect little tiny Jordan to act like the mouse who roared while the most powerful leader of the free world got upset that the world did not see him at his best.

Interestingly, King Abdullah II of Jordan was in the United States when ISIS released the video on the Internet. What did he do? The King immediately cut his trip short in order to return to Jordan to comfort the family of the lost pilot.

Can you—the reader—appreciate the difference between Obama’s and Abdullah’s reaction? I do not think for a minute that King Abdullah worried about the optics—his place was with the victims and with his people.

Winston Churchill has never been one of Obama’s heroes. When Obama first took the White House, one of the first things he did while he was in office was to remove the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office and send it back to the British Embassy. The British probably felt surprised at this sign of presidential disrespect, for one never unilaterally returns a gift from a foreign leader!

In retrospect, it is not hard to see why.  Churchill once said: Continue reading “A Contrast in Leadership: King Abdullah and President Obama” →

King Faisal–Weizmann Agreement – When the Arabs asked the Jews to return to Israel

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

Whenever you hear the Palestinian rhetoric, one would get the impression that Jews were nothing more than a European transplant who came over and seized all the Arab lands they could grab. Needless to say, there is much more history to this narrative than most people realize–including our President of the United States. When people ignore history, they change the narrative into the image of their device. Sadly, this has happened way too much in the last 40 + years, but armed with knowledge–we can change the public misconception about the real Arab and Jewish relationship concerning Palestine (as it was called at that time). Here is a fascinating article I think most of you will find enlightening:

Feisal-Frankfurter Correspondence (March 1919)

Letter from Emir Feisal (Son of Hussein Bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca | Great grandson of the prophet Muhammad) to Felix Frankfurter, associate of Dr. Chaim Weizmann:

DELEGATION HEDJAZIENNE

Paris Peace Conference

March 3, 1919

Dear Mr. Frankfurter:

I want to take this opportunity of my first contact with American Zionists to tell you what I have often been able to say to Dr. Weizmann in Arabia and Europe.

We feel that the Arabs and Jews are cousins in having suffered similar oppressions at the hands of powers stronger than themselves, and by a happy coincidence have been able to take the first step towards the attainment of their national ideals together. The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement. Our deputation here in Paris is fully acquainted with the proposals submitted yesterday by the Zionist Organisation to the Peace Conference, and we regard them as moderate and proper. We will do our best, in so far as we are concerned, to help them through: we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home.

With the chiefs of your movement, especially with Dr. Weizmann, we have had and continue to have the closest relations. He has been a great helper of our cause, and I hope the Arabs may soon be in a position to make the Jews some return for their kindness. We are working together for a reformed and revived Near East, and our two movements complete one another. The Jewish movement is national and not imperialist. Our movement is national and not imperialist, and there is room in Syria for us both. Indeed I think that neither can be a real success without the other.

People less informed and less responsible than our leaders and yours, ignoring the need for cooperation of the Arabs and Zionists, have been trying to exploit the local difficulties that must necessarily arise in Palestine in the early stages of our movements. Some of them have, I am afraid, misrepresented your aims to the Arab peasantry, and our aims to the Jewish peasantry, with the result that interested parties have been able to make capital out of what they call our differences. I wish to give you my firm conviction that these differences are not on questions of principle, but on matters of detail such as must inevitably occur in every contact of neighbouring peoples, and as are easily adjusted by mutual good will. Indeed nearly all of them will disappear with fuller knowledge.

I look forward, and my people with me look forward, to a future in which we will help you and you will help us, so that the countries in which we are mutually interested may once again take their places in the community of civilised peoples of the world.

Believe me,

Yours sincerely,

(Sgd.) Feisal

Letter of reply from Felix Frankfurter to Emir Feisal:

Paris Peace Conference

March 5, 1919

Royal Highness,

Allow me, on behalf of the Zionist Organisation, to acknowledge your recent letter with deep appreciation.

Those of us who come from the United States have already been gratified by the friendly relations and the active cooperation maintained between you and the Zionist leaders, particularly Dr. Weizmann. We knew it could not be otherwise; we knew that the aspirations of the Arab and the Jewish peoples were parallel, that each aspired to re-establish its nationality in its own homeland, each making its own distinctive contribution to civilisation, each seeking its own peaceful mode of life.

The Zionist leaders and the Jewish people for whom they speak have watched with satisfaction the spiritual vigour of the Arab movement. Themselves seeking justice, they are anxious that the just national aims of the Arab people be confirmed and safeguarded by the Peace Conference. We knew from your acts and your past utterances that the Zionist movement — in other words the national aim of the Jewish people — had your support and the support of the Arab people for whom you speak. These aims are now before the Peace Conference as definite proposals by the Zionist Organisation. We are happy indeed that you consider these proposals “moderate and proper,” and that we have in you a staunch supporter for their realisation.

For both the Arab and the Jewish peoples there are difficulties ahead — difficulties that challenge the united statesmanship of Arab and Jewish leaders. For it is no easy task to rebuild two great civilisations that have been suffering oppression and misrule for centuries. We each have our difficulties we shall work out as friends, friends who are animated by similar purposes, seeking a free and full development for the two neighbouring peoples. The Arabs and Jews are neighbours in territory; we cannot but live side by side as friends.

Very respectfully,

(Sgd.) Felix Frankfurter

PART 3

Agreement Between Emir Feisal and Dr. Weizmann

Faisal–Weizmann Agreement

3 January 1919

His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realizing that the surest means of working out the consummation of their natural aspirations is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following:

Articles:

Article I

The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding, and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in the respective territories.

Article II

Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.

Article III

In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine, all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917.

Article IV

All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.

Article V

No regulation or law shall be made prohibiting or interfering in any way with the free exercise of religion; and further, the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall ever be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

Article VI

The Mohammedan Holy Places shall be under Mohammedan control.

Article VII

The Zionist Organization proposes to send to Palestine a Commission of experts to make a survey of the economic possibilities of the country, and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organization will place the aforementioned Commission at the disposal of the Arab State for the purpose of a survey of the economic possibilities of the Arab State and to report upon the best means for its development. The Zionist Organization will use its best efforts to assist the Arab State in providing the means for developing the natural resources and economic possibilities thereof.

Article VIII

The parties hereto agree to act in complete accord and harmony on all matters embraced herein before the Peace Congress.

Article IX

Any matters of dispute which may arise between the contracting parties hall be referred to the British Government for arbitration. Given under our hand at London, England, the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen

Chaim Weizmann Feisal Ibn-Hussein

Reservation by the Emir Feisal

If the Arabs are established as I have asked in my manifesto of 4 January, addressed to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I will carry out what is written in this agreement. If changes are made, I cannot be answerable for failing to carry out this agreement.

What happened then?
http://www.factualisrael.com/root-cause-conflicts-middle-east/

Kudos to factualisrael.com for their excellent article.

The Culture of Life vs. the Culture of Death

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

In my opinion, the brilliant 20th century Eric Fromm ranks as one of the greatest psychologists and social prophets of the century. I would also add that Fromm must rank as one of the least appreciated Jewish philosophers of his time as well.

One of Fromm’s greatest theories pertains to two opposite impulses that are struggling for supremacy in the world. He refers to them as necrophilia vs. biophilia. He explains that necrophilia, or the “love of the dead” is an ideation that is attracted to everything that is dead, e.g., corpses, decay, filth, dirt. As an illustration, Fromm mentions how the Nazi concentration camps were dedicated to the industry of death and genocide. Aside from killing the Jew, the Nazi genocide machine aimed to create an atmosphere of filth surrounding the Jew, who seldom ever had the opportunity to bathe. My father once told me that while he was in Auschwitz, he often bathed in the snow to keep his body clean, while the Nazi officers laughed at his behavior. According to Fromm, the goal of necrophilia as political and religious phenomena is to transform everything that is living into death. This culture dedicated to death defined Nazism for the evil scourge it was.

And yet, in our postwar illusions,we never dared to imagine that we would ever see this kind of menace threatening civilization again. It seemed too inconceivable.

But we were wrong—dead wrong.

The continuous attacks on Israelis only proves that the spirit of Nazism is alive and well–even thriving–in the Jihadist world today.

Whereas Nazism always remained a secular political philosophy dedicated to eradicating the world of Jews and other undesirables, today’s Jihadist movement poses a far greater threat to all of civilization because the engines that run its campaign of genocide derives from religion itself. Let us be clear: Jihadism is a death-force that aims to destroy life as we know it for the glorification of Allah, who behaves more like the bloodthirsty deity of the Bible known as Molech.

In fact, it is impossible to differentiate between the two.

Jihadists love saying, “We love death more than you love life”[1]

The worse part of necrophilia is that the people this philosophy affects makes them totally indifferent to life and even attracted to death. This would explain why being a martyr for Islam is so important. In the West Bank and Gaza, Palestinians have museums celebrating the sacrifice of his human bombs; museums decorated with Israeli body parts across the wall.

Sounds like a museum made for Freddie Kruger.

The culture of Israel in contrast, corresponds to what Fromm calls, biophilia–the love of life, the attraction to everything that lives and grows. Preserving life and preventing death is one form ofbiophilia. Biophilous tendencies can be much more varied and tend to integrate and unite, to fuse with different and opposite. Biophilia is life that changes, grows, and develops to the changing circumstances of the environment. Fromm believed that for biophilia to emerge, there has to be certain circumstances to enhance its growth, e.g., the absence of injustice, the love of creativity, the presence of freedom, and the spirit to innovate.

Israel’s technological prowess continues to shape the world in new and exciting ways. This past week, Israeli companies announced they have invented a new way to recharge cellphone batteries instantaneously.

Contrast this with the new story about an A Palestinian baby who receives a life-saving bone marrow treatment worth $55,000—paid by an Israeli pediatrician. Most mothers would appreciate someone saving their child’s life, but what does this baby’s mother say?

While waiting for her son’s treatment in the Israeli hospital, Raida says that she would be happy to see her son become a “shahid” – an Islamic martyr for Jerusalem. “Like Arafat said? ‘A million shahids (martyrs) for Jerusalem?” asks the journalist Shlomi Eldar. “More than a million. All of us are for Jerusalem. All of our people,” she replies. “All of us, not just a million, we’re all for Jerusalem. Do you understand?”“Death is a natural thing for us. We’re not afraid to di[e],” Raida continues. From the smallest infant, even younger than Muhammad [her baby son,] to the oldest person, we’d all sacrifice ourselves for Jerusalem. We feel we have the right to it. … It’s heresy to say that Jerusalem isn’t ours.”[2]

In spiritual terms, biophilia encourages people to search for self-awareness, aspirations, and moral growth. Israel continues to develop technologies that improve the fabric of life while the Palestinian culture of death, which worships a god who loves shihads (martyrs) has produced a moral decadence that threatens the peace of humanity.

The time has come for the Palestinians and Israelis to work together and embrace a new paradigm of life that brings prosperity to all of its people.

Instead of putting more pressure to force Israel to  give up their land to a person that is hell bent upon their destruction, we need to put the pressure where it belongs by cutting off aid to the Palestinian government until it ceases its campaign of genocide against Israel and her people.

It is time for our country to do everything in its power to end the Palestinian paradigm of barbarism and savagery instead of rewarding their delinquent behavior with billions of American dollars and moral support.  In the meantime, every American Jew ought to be proud of Israel’s commitment to further the culture of life.

Golda Meir said it best, “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.”

 

 

Is Islam Really a “Religion of Peace”?

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

image

Cultivating moderate Muslim voices is a mighty challenge—especially given the paucity of moderate Muslims in Western societies. John Kerry recently spoke a dinner honoring Shaarik Zafar’s inclusion into the Department of Homeland Security as a senior adviser. Here are some of the salient points that Kerry made in his speech:

  • Let me be really clear as a starting point for today’s conversation: The real face of Islam is not what we saw yesterday, when the world bore witness again to the unfathomable brutality of ISIL terrorist murderers, when we saw Steven Sotloff, an American journalist who left home in Florida in order to tell the story of brave people in the Middle East – we saw him brutally taken from us in an act of medieval savagery by a coward hiding behind a mask.
  • The real face of Islam is a peaceful religion based on the dignity of all human beings. It’s one where Muslim communities are leading the fight against poverty. It’s one where Muslim communities are providing basic healthcare and emergency assistance on the front lines of some of our most devastating humanitarian crises. And it is one where Muslim communities are advocating for universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the most basic freedom to practice one’s faith openly and freely. America’s faith communities, including American Muslims, are sources of strength for all of us. They’re an essential part of our national fabric, and we are committed to deepening our partnerships with them.
  • Confronting climate change is, in the long run, one of the greatest challenges that we face, and you can see this duty or responsibility laid down in scriptures, clearly, beginning in Genesis. And Muslim-majority countries are among the most vulnerable. Our response to this challenge ought to be rooted in a sense of stewardship of Earth. And for me and for many of us here today, that responsibility comes from God. [1]

Moderate Islam is a loose construction of Islamic law, which ignores certain portions of it for the sake of modernity. The Prime Minister of Turkey seems to take umbrage with the term, “moderate Islam” and had these bold words to say, “These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

One would suspect that Erdogan would probably consider the Islam of organizations such as CAIR and its Western apologists as disingenuous.

So, this takes us to the substantive question we must ask regarding John Kerry’s speech: Is ISIS the real face of Islam?

Let us consider the facts: ISIS claims to have to anywhere between 80-100,000 people willing to fight for its beliefs. Their numbers could very easily grow exponentially in the next several years with their slick and sophisticated marketing. This is not a small cadre of thugs, it is part of a global jihad dedicated to conquering the Western world.

ISIS is seeking new fighters from Europe, Africa, North and South America and Asia to help expand their caliphate. This poses a far more serious threat than global warming and climate change.

The vast numbers behind ISIS claim to practice their Islamic faith very seriously. Following in the footsteps of Mohammed, they grow their beards, shave their mustaches, pray five times a day, and show a willingness to die for their religion. To any one of us with  a modicum of common sense, the ISIS followers behave like pious Muslims. Across the Middle Eastern world and Africa, groups like  ISIS, al Qaeda, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab in Somalia, the Taliban all bear the same Islamic label.

Making believe that Islam is a peaceful religion is an illusion. If Islam has so many “moderates” why are they so impotent in stopping the spread of the radical global Jihad movement?

To use a philosophical analogy, the skeptic Epicurus once asked:

  • Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.  Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

So, I must ask similar questions regarding “Moderate Islam.”

  • Is Moderate Islam willing to prevent religious fanaticism perpetuated in its name, but is not able? Then Moderate Islam is impotent. If Moderate Islam is both able and willing to do something to prevent evil deeds that is perpetuated in its name, then why are such acts of atrocity still continuing to occur on a daily basis everywhere in the civilized world? If Moderate Islam is neither able or willing to combat the fanaticism of the global Jihadists, then why call them “Moderate Islam”?

The civilized is appalled and dismayed by the Islamic countries that have done so little to prevent such a dangerous menace from growing.

Whenever they behead the kufar (non-believers), whether in the Middle East, London, or wherever, they are merely following the example of what Islam’s prophet Muhammad did to a Jewish tribe called Bani Quraiza mentioned in the Quaran Sura 47:4. There he stated, “, ‘When you meet the unbelievers and fight, smite their necks.’”  Such are the decrees of Allah. This is what we are hearing in countries such as Norway, Denmark, and other European countries that have historically never had much of an interest in Middle Eastern affairs and its problems.

Yes, by the testimony of the Quran, ISIS behaves likes good Muslims—whether the moderates like what they are doing or not.

Muhammad would be proud.

ISIS is not the only threat posed by Jihadist Islam. Iran and Hezbollah are just as dangerous—even now, as they aspire to make nuclear weapons along with a delivery system to threaten mainland America and Europe.

One of President Obama’s senior advisors to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a man named Muhammad Elibiary, who is an admirer of the Islamic teachings of Ayatollah Khomeini. Elibiary was invited as a guest speaker at a December 2004 conference in Dallas, titled “A Tribute to the Great Islamic Visionary,” which was held in honor of the late Ayatollah Khomeini. If Elibiary really opposed this Jihadist madman, why would he speak at conference honoring Khomeini’s legacy?  Why would our President put such a man in such a position of power as a senior advisor in the DHS? Could it be that somebody is spiking the “Moderate Islam” community cool-aid for gullible Westerners?

Like Erdogan, the admirers of Khomeini categorically rejected the notion of Islam as a religion of peace.  Khomeini made these words emphatically clear in his speeches:

  • Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war.   Those who say this are witless.  Islam says: ‘Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all!  Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter their armies’. . . Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword!  People cannot be made obedient except with the sword!  The sword is the key to paradise, which can be opened only for holy warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight.  Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war?  I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.’” [3]

While there are doctrinal differences between the Sunni and the Shiites, the one common thread that unites all global Jihadists is their goal to conquer the Western world.

Unfortunately,  there are practically no “Moderate” Islamic leaders who are willing to do anything to stop the radicals from completely commandeering their religion.

Mr. Kerry, global warming is not the problem we ought to be concerned about at this present moment in history. We need to stop deluding ourselves of the obvious truth: Jihadist Islam is not a small cadre of fanatics. Its forces are legion and we must come up with a viable strategy to combat it, defeat it, and ultimately eradicate this religious plague from the earth.

Notes:

[1] http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/09/231245.htm

[2] Elibary has often praised the late Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb, whose ideas have define the modern jihadist movement – especially his call for violent jihad and for the purification of Islam from the forces of unbelief. See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2014/06/obamas-dhs-senior-dhs-adviser-mohamed-elibiary-inevitable-caliphate-returns.html/#sthash.BpIKSvx4.dpuf

[3]   Ibn Waraq, Why I am not a Muslim (New York: Prometheus Books, 1995), pp. 12-13.

Nero and Obama: A Remarkable Parallel in History

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel
  • If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle”—Sun  Tzu, The Art of War

The words of Sun Tzu convey new significance in light of President Obama’s disclosure. In his most recent speech, the President was asked an important and obvious question many Americans are asking themselves: How will we defeat ISIS? With blunt honesty and candor, the President said, “We don’t have a strategy yet.”

As I listened to his words, I found myself asking, “Did he really say that?” Then I wondered. “How is ISIS reacting this statement?”

Even the President’s media supporters are scratching their heads on the latest Presidential gaffe, whose optics makes our leader appear as though he is totally disengaged from an evil that makes Nazism pale in comparison. How can any moral and sensible human being say that the ISIS conflict is an Iraqi problem to solve? When we look at the decapitated heads of Shiite, Christian and Yazidi children,  how can we not take arms against a religious and political movement that joyfully slaughters in the name of psychotic Islam?

According to Maimonides, the first step in a person’s moral and spiritual rehabilitation involves coming to terms with one’s past sins and mistakes. Acknowledging  that one did anything wrong is perhaps the hardest but most significant step one can take.

For the President in particular, he has yet to admit the most obvious fact that is staring at his face: Jihadist Islam is at war with the United States and the Western civilization as a whole. It is also at war with other forms of Jihadist Islam, e.g., Shiite Islam as represented by the repressive Iranian regime. In short, Islam is at war within itself and it has been probably since the inception of its religion.

This is actually good news, for when a house is divided, it can be conquered much more easily. ISIS recognizes its Achilles heel and this is the principle reason why ISIS has targeted other Islamic movements and states (with the notable exception of Turkey, which is the only western country supporting ISIS—this is a subject for another article because of its seriousness).

Obama’s stark admission is all the more surprising since ISIS did not emerge ex nihilo over night. They have been a major thorn in our side since the beginning of the Iraqi war. This new political entity makes Al Qaeda pale in comparison. It has approximately two billion dollars of money it stole from the Iraqi people and it is offering salaries of $33,000 to any young dysfunctional thug who is willing  to join its ranks. Judging by the slick marketing, they are probably offering a nice retirement plan and other terrestrial incentives.

All right, in the interest of problem solving, what kind of strategy should our government be focusing on? Is it reasonable to expect that economic pressure will work, e.g., the threat of sanctions (as we have tried with Putin)? Will diplomatic pressure work? It appears that ISIS could care less about these possibilities. Military pressure with an objective of eradicating the infrastructure of this evil organization is the only viable solution. If left unchecked, hundreds of millions in human lives will die if we adopt a supine attitude.

In addition, Western media outlets such as YOUTUBE, Twitter, and Facebook need to all ban these retrograde people from using their technology from promoting Jihadism.

In addition we need real international leaders who will not take a neutral attitude about ISIS.

Thankfully, the English PM Cameron continues to model the kind of leadership we need in our country. Cameron said last week:

  • The threat we face today comes from the poisonous narrative of Islamist extremism. The terrorist threat was not created by the Iraq war ten years ago. It existed even before the horrific attacks on 9/11. This threat cannot be solved simply by dealing with the perceived grievances over Western foreign policy. We cannot appease this ideology. We have to confront it at home and abroad.

Applying his words to actions, the UK raised the terror threat level from “substantial” to “severe,” Cameron said they will introduce new laws to fights terrorists and seize passports from terror suspects. He also plans to offer more details on the UK’s plans in a few days.

Cameron’s remarks remind us that we need leadership that understands the problems posed by Jihadist Islam.

Even the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius has a message about Iraq for Barack Obama: Get back to the White House and do something:

  • I know it is the holiday period in our Western countries,’ Fabius told a radio interviewer Tuesday in France,’ but when people are dying, you must come back from vacation.

Ditto.

In the Great Fire of Rome, historians—both ancient and modern—are unsure who caused this great conflagration. Some historians think that Emperor Nero instigated it and he fiddled, as Rome burned. Some blame the Christians because Nero persecuted them. In any event, some day historians may make a similar analogy about a morally confused President, who preferred to play golf and conduct Democratic fundraisers rather than defend his people when they needed him the most.

After 9/11, President Bush put together fifty countries to combat the Al Qaeda. Our President ought to be assembling a similar coalition, which may offer him an opportunity to demonstrate true statesmanship—if he is up to the moral task.

Jewish leaders in particular have also been too sheepish on this danger as it threatens not only Israel, but the United States.

  • Open borders with Mexico is viewed as a golden opportunity to create numerous attacks that could threaten the American homeland. If the President was really concerned about the border, he would close it up as soon as possible to minimize this threat from ever occurring.
  • ISIS can easily hire Mexican drug cartel terrorists to attack the country’s electrical grid. Were this to occur, there would be a paralysis that could result in tens of millions of people dying because of the collapse of our country’s infrastructure. An EMP bomb could easily lead to the death of 270 million Americans and take years to reconstruct.
  • President Obama should be building our military at this perilous time of history and use the country’s money to strengthen the electrical grid from terrorist attacks.[1]
  • Instead of cutting military aid to Israel, the President should be increasing greater aid to ensure Israel has the means to protect herself from ISIS and Iran.

The inclusion of Muslim Brotherhood leaders like Mohammed Elibary in Obama’s Department of Homeland Security is troubling. This is a man who considered the late Ayatollah Khomeini as a “great Islamic leader”[2] and even praised the emergence of a new Muslim caliphate taking place in Iraq on June 13 in his Twitter log, and in other places,[3] clearly shows that either Obama’s judgment is severely impaired, or that he is identifying with the Jihadist agenda in its effort to unite the Muslim world. Either scenario ought to make each of us cringe.

To conclude, as the philosopher George Santayana famously said, “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Considering everything we  are witnessing in the world today, not only does it appear that we have learned nothing from the Holocaust, our country’s foolishness combined with the foolishness of the European community will lead to a destruction far greater than anything we have witnessed in the 20th century. However, this time it will be fueled by the religious zealotry of Jihadist Islam, the scourge of modern times.

Historically, Jihadist Islam threatened the world once before in the annals of human memory. The murderous Jihadist Timur Khan (1370–1405) wiped out close to twenty million non-Muslims as he carved out his empire in India, the Indian subcontinent, Pakistan, and parts of China, all of which constituted 5% of the world population.

Jihadist Islam has always been greatest mass-murdering force in the history of humankind. As a champion of freedom, the United States cannot take an apathetic stance regarding the expansion of ISIS and its legion of Jihadist supporters.

Moral Confusion in the White House

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

 

In a number of recent news reports, we have heard the White House blast Israel for flagrantly killing children, mothers, and the sick. This past Sunday, Face the Nation featured the senior White House advisor Valerie Jarrett said that Israeli attacks on Gaza schools and hospitals were “indefensible.”

“This is why the ceasefire is so important,” Jarrett said. “It’s a devastating situation. Israel absolutely has the right to defend itself, and we are Israel’s staunchest ally. But you also can’t condone the killing of all of these innocent children.” “I think everyone involved is frustrated,” Jarrett said. “But you can’t let your frustration get in the way of trying to be a constructive player here, and that’s what [Obama’s] determined to do.”

These tunnels extended well into Israeli territory, and confessions of many of the captured Hamas Jihadists spoke about a 9/11 type of massacre scheduled for Rosh Hashanah, where thousands of Hamas terrorists would capture as many Jewish children and families, as they inflict a crippling blow to Israel. John Kerry reminds me of a Rodney Dangerfield personality. He gets “no respect” from Israel. Could that be because he said that Hamas is allowed to keep their terror tunnels?

Who is designing our country’s foreign policy? Kafka?

One would think that Janet Garret would have said, “Indefensible!” but this was hardly the case. Still, as we speak, the US Embassy has canceled tourist visas for Israelis coming to the United States. For all the 75% or more members of the Jewish community, do you not see anything wrong with this kind of stigmata the Obama Administration has imposed?

While there are about 30-40 tunnels, each of these tunnels costs about one million dollars each. Obama just sent to Gaza forty million dollars. No, he didn’t send food or medical supplies, he sent money. Ask yourselves an obvious question: How does he expect Hamas to spend that money? Does anyone really think Hamas will spend it on theme parks or museums and more hospitals?

Hamas has converted the entire country of Gaza into one colossal human shield. Why doesn’t Obama or Kerry ever condemn the United Nations for allowing their buildings and schools to be transformed into arsenals?  Why are the President and his quislings taking a “neutral” stand regarding this conflict? Why don’t they say, “Beating innocent civilians to remain as human shields instead of leaving their homes is morally indefensible?”

Obama’s DHS has members of the Muslim Brotherhood serving in the US government. You can be sure that the Muslim Brotherhood is doing their best to help their followers in Gaza, who all admire the Muslim Brotherhood and ISIS.

Then again, what about the numerous ballistic reports that prove that many of the hospitals have been hit by Hamas missiles that misfired into the hospitals and schools?

If we want to be honest about war, there has seldom ever been a war where innocent people don’t die. Just ask the Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Just ask the Afghani people immediately after 9/11, when the United States imposed a media blackout as American planes destroyed over 5000 innocent Afghanis.

No, the Israeli army’s moral standards towers above our own country here in the United States.

Does Israel have a right to defend itself? You better believe it. If President Obama and Janet Garret led the Allies against the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese army, you can be sure that the bad guys would have won.

War is not for the squeamish. Its cost in human lives is horrific so that bellicose nations will think twice about waging war in the future.

Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other moderate Arab countries are sick and tired of seeing Hamas out of control. They are worried about ISIS and Iran. As we speak, we are watching a dramatic realignment of regional powers, where once warring nations with Israel have paradoxically become allies (in an unofficial manner).

How should the President act? He should look at Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, as an example of a leader whose moral compass is intact. Harper said, “Self-defense is “not merely an Israeli right” to be exercised only in the abstract, but an “Israeli obligation” that must be defended by all Western nations.” He added further, “Canada calls on its allies and partners to recognize that these terrorist acts [by Hamas] are unacceptable and that solidarity with Israel is the best way of stopping the conflict. . . Canada mourns the death and suffering of innocent civilians in Gaza. Responsibility rests solely with Hamas and its allies, who launched and continue to feed this crisis,’’ he said .

Harper also rejects outright calls coming from both the White House and the UN that Israel must agree to a negotiated ceasefire with Hamas. “Not only should Israel not agree to a ceasefire, says Harper, Israel should continue her offensive until the Iranian-backed terror group is ‘massively degraded,’ if not eliminated entirely. Indiscriminate rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel are terrorist acts, for which there is no justification.”

That is how an ally of Israel ought to behave.

PS, Happy Birthday Mr. President. Please use this new year of your life to do what is right and noble–defend Israel.

Frankenstein’s Monster Redux: The Creation of a Muslim Caliphate

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

Maimonides raises a relevant question about the nature of repentance in his famous halachic tract, The Laws of Penitence, “How do we know whether a person has truly achieved repentance?  If a person finds himself in the same situation where he now has the ability to sin in the same exact manner he did earlier, but he consciously refrains from doing so—not because of fear or ability,  but from conviction—that person has truly repented. For example, if a man had an illicit sexual liaison with a woman, and later, they found themselves at a private place, in the same country, feeling the same sexual chemistry—but he refrains from giving in to his desire, this person has repented.[1]

As Jews, the American Jewish nationalist, Meir Kahane (1932-1990) famously coined the iconic phrase, “Never Again!” and this saying has become a part of every Jew’s lexicon. The State of Israel in particular, lives by this motto as well. Jews will never allow themselves to go like lambs to the slaughterhouses again.

My father, Leo Israel Samuel (z”l) was a Holocaust survivor and he once told me about conversation he had with Amon Leopold Goeth (the infamous villain of Schindler’s List), the  commandant of the Kraków-Płaszów, Poland. He told some friends, “The Germans taught the Turks how to kill the Armenians . . . .” My father was there while they had this conversation; he worked for a short time as his tailor; and he asked Goeth, “Who were the Armenians?” Goeth sneered, “The Armenians were a type of Jew . . .”

Goeth’s sardonic remark ought to remind us that when it comes to the genocide of any people—“We are all Jewish,” in a manner of speaking.

As the world watches the never-ending saga of the Israeli and Gazan conflict, civilized countries of the world are looking away from a very serious genocidal attack that is taking place in one of the oldest Christian communities in the world, the Assyrian Christian population of Mosul, Iraq, which is now controlled by ISIS. A couple of weeks ago, the Islamic Jihadists issued the following ultimatum: If they did not leave by July 19th, they would all have to convert to Islam, pay a fine, or face death by the sword. Within a few days, 3000 of the Assyrian Christians fled, while the Jihadists began their systematic destruction of all the ancient Christian relics that the country proudly kept on display during the Hussein era. A statue of the Virgin Mary outside of one of Mosul’s churches was destroyed and was later replaced with a black flag. This Christian is one of the last left in Mosul, as most others have fled, many leaving with only the clothes on their backs.

Jihadist Islam’s behavior is consistent with what Jihadists have done many times in the past. In Jerusalem, the Mufti routinely destroys any archaeological relics regarding ancient Israel’s past. In 2001, the Taliban destroyed 1,700-year-old sandstone statues of Buddha with anti-aircraft and tank fire in Afghanistan. There is a good reason for their destructive actions: they wish to permanently change the narrative of the non-Muslim peoples; like the prescriptions found in the Bible, where Moses orders the Israelites to destroy every remnant of Canaanite culture, the Jihadists are a lot like ancient Israelites on steroids. Hegel once said that “Islam was Judaism gone mad,” and while we may find this language somewhat politically incorrect and provocative, I would qualify Hegel’s remark, “Jihadist Islam was Judaism gone mad.” Nobody has a problem with law-abiding and ethical Muslims who go about their business in a responsible way; the world’s problem is with the Jihadist strand of Islam—and its followers are legion. Heads of Christians are literally rolling down the streets of Mosul and other cities. Unfortunately, the moderate Muslims of the world are a quiet breed; they fear to speak out because of the dangers their families would face.

What is happening in the ISIS controlled sections of Iraq and Syria is a template for other countries where Jihadists threaten the “Sunday people” in addition to the “Saturday people.” General Sisi saved the Coptic communities of a similar fate in Egypt, when the Muslim Brotherhood—a kissing brother of the Hamas—threatened to wipe out one of the oldest Christian communities in the world going back nearly 1900 years.

Why should Jews be concerned? What is happening to the Christians can easily happen to the Jews if the United States, the Vatican, and the Western countries fail to stand up to the newest incarnation of Nazism of our time—fueled by the some of the most fanatical passages of the Koran, who interpret their scriptures quite literally.

When the President asked for 500 million dollars to support the Syrian Rebels, maybe somebody forgot to tell him that the Syrian rebels have joined forces with ISIS.

Obama’s support of the Rebel/ISIS coalition in Syria ought to make us wonder: Why would anyone in the White House want to see a new Islamic caliphate emerge in the Middle East? The President has several members in his DHS who are members of the Muslim Brotherhood,[2] a known terrorist organization that is also the godfather of Hamas. One of the DHS senior advisers is a man named Mohammed Elibary, who is also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood (a Sunni movement) who supports the emergence of a new Muslim caliphate[3] in the Middle East.[4] I suspect that his advisors encouraged the President to allow the ISIS (another Sunni movement) to arise so that it might serve as a counterweight to the Shiites of Iran. These two groups would be in a perpetual state of war with one another. While tactically, this might be the case, it is also a reckless policy could just as easily backfire against everyone. Why? One reason is that there are unintended consequences that we must anticipate. Dr. Frankenstein wanted to find a way to help people overcome death, but in his zeal for success, he created a monster. We may well be watching a similar story unfold in the Middle East today.

In the meantime, the moral and political leaders have a role to preserve the precious and peaceful Christian communities who have always lived in peace with their neighbors. We owe history much for their existence and preservation. As Jews, can we watch another genocide take shape and  say or do nothing about it? I hope we will show the world that we will not stand by the blood of our fellow Christian neighbors as the fanatical Jihadists assault civilization and return us back to the decadent centuries of an early Islam.


[1] Maimonides, MT Hilchot Teshuvah 3:1.

[3] In one tweet, Mohamed Elibiary, a controversial figure and member of DHS’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC), discussed what he described as the “inevitable” return of a Muslim caliphate Friday on Twitter. “As I’ve said b4 inevitable that ‘Caliphate’ returns,” Elibiary tweeted in response to a question about the terror group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (also known as ISIS, or the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham), which is currently seeking to overthrow the Iraqi government and instate strict Sharia law in the country. See https://twitter.com/MohamedElibiary/status/477503616794644480

Blessed be the Whistle-Blowers

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

 

In the technological age we are living in, a person can just about make up anything regarding conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere. Given the ubiquity of illusion, we must wonder: Did this conversation actually take place between the President and the Israeli Prime Minister?

Now here is the transcript that appeared in the Israeli news on Channel One:

Damning evidence has emerged of US President Barack Obama’s dismissal of Israel’s position in favor of supporting the position of Hamas and its allies during ceasefire talks.

A “senior US official” leaked an audio recording of a telephone conversation between Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to Channel One. In it the 35-minute conversation, which took place on Sunday, the US President appears downright hostile at points, and even cuts off Netanyahu in the middle of his protestations over a one-sided truce proposal which would have seen Hamas receive all its key demands, but that Israel ultimately rejected.

The following is an excerpt of the conversation, published in Hebrew by Channel One:

Obama: I demand that Israel agrees to an immediate, unilateral ceasefire and halt all offensive activities – particularly airstrikes.

Netanyahu: What will Israel receive in return for a ceasefire?

Obama: I believe that Hamas will stop firing rockets – silence will be met with silence.

Netanyahu: Hamas violated all five previous ceasefires, it is a terrorist organization which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel.

Obama: I repeat and expect Israel to unilaterally stop all its military activity. The pictures of destruction from Gaza distance the world from Israel’s position.

Netanyahu: Kerry’s proposal was completely unrealistic and gives Hamas the military and diplomatic advantage.

Obama: Within a week of the end of Israel’s military activities, Qatar and Turkey will begin negotiations with Hamas on the basis of the 2012 understanding [following the end of Operation Pillar of Defense – ed.], including Israel’s commitment to removing the siege and restrictions on Gaza,

Netanyahu: Qatar and Turkey are the biggest supporters of Hamas. It is impossible to rely on them to be fair mediators.

Obama: I trust Qatar and Turkey, and Israel is in no position to choose its mediators.

Netanyahu: I object, because Hamas is able to continue and to fire rockets and to use tunnels for terror attacks…

Obama – interrupts Netanyahu mid-sentence: The ball is in Israel’s court – it is obligated to end all military activities.

Interestingly enough, both the State Department and the Prime Minister’s office announced that this alleged conversation never occurred and it is fabricated. The news report is embarrassing for the President. Some things that are said in private should not be said in public—such is the way of diplomacy. The Prime Minister would certainly never publicly embarrass the President. Such behavior is unbecoming of an ally.

How do we determine the truth whether this conversation took place or not?

Channel 1 reporter claims that the PM-POTUS transcript legit: Despite rejections by American and Israeli officials, Channel 1′s Or Nahari insists that the transcript leaked to him by a “senior American official” is authentic, but acknowledges that the quotes he published were merely an excerpt from a longer conversation.[1]

Personally, I think there is ample reason to believe that the gist of this conversation is true. For one thing, the President has not always been truthful with the American public in the past. We know that he has cracked down many times on whistle-blowers threatens journalists who criticize Obama and spies on them. Secondly, he promised we could keep our physicians once Obamacare kicked in. Then again, he also told us that the Benghazi attack was because of a video and was not an act of terrorism. Then again, there is the IRS scandal which strongly indicates the current administration has had a hand in pursuing conservative political groups and donors.

Is there reason to be suspicious that this transcript might actually be “true”? I believe the readers of my column are intelligent enough to answer this question.

If I could make a recommendation to the President, it would go something like this:

  • Have a great five week vacation. By the time you’re back in the White House, Hamas will be defeated and one more terrorist threat will be eliminated from the Middle East. One behalf of the Jewish people, we want to thank you for not interfering with what Israel is about to do.

In short, “Blessed be the whistle-blowers, for they shall inherit the earth.”


[1] Cited fromt: http://pamelageller.com/2014/07/leaked-transcript-phonecall-obama-netanyahu.html/#sthash.LADZ5kVy.dpuf

 

Jihadist Islam is a Graver Threat than Global Warming

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel
View image on Twitter
  • The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.—Barak Hussein Obama

When we look at the violence that is taking place throughout the cities of Europe, it is clear that Jihadist Islam (a.k.a. Radical Islam) is no longer an aberration. When someone asked the Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan what he thought of Moderate Islam, he sneered, “There is no such thing as Moderate Islam—only Islam.”

He’s correct. All you have to do is look at what is happening in Paris today. Muslim thugs are attempting to burn Paris to the ground. In Paris, Berlin, Rome, New York, Los Angeles, and wherever, we are no longer hearing, “Death to all Zionists!” We are now hearing, “Death to the  Jews!”

Does this sound vaguely familiar?

While many of us would much rather consider global warming as the most pressing issue of our day (I am not necessarily taking umbrage with this issue, I drive a hybrid!), many of us living in the West do not want to believe that Islam is at war with Western Civilization.

Unfortunately, nothing can be further from the truth. A Chaldean Christian friend of mine complained how the Chaldean Christian community in Iraq is being threatened either with the infamous Muslim poll tax, conversion, or death if they refuse.

When Erdogan boldly said, “There is no such thing as Moderate Islam—only Islam,” his comment unnerved me to my core. For many years and decades, I have been involved in creating Islamic-Jewish-Christian interfaith groups and dialogue around the country. I have met many fine Muslims and Imams who shared a mutual respect for one another’s religion.

But after watching how Jihadist Islam is behaving throughout the world, I must say Erdogan is right—there is no such thing as Moderate Islam. Clearly, the radicals have commandeered Islam and there is nobody on the horizon within the Muslim communities around the world who is going to challenge the religious crazies and cultists that claim to be the “authentic Muslims.”

While I still believe that such dialogue is important as it is necessary, I fear that the progressive voices within the Muslim community are becoming increasingly marginalized by the vast majority of Muslims around the world who are determined to reinstate the caliphate and created a theocratic state based upon Sharia Law.

For the record, I oppose all theocracies; they are a relic of a past and decadent age when rabbinical, ecclesiastical, and Islamic religious leaders exploited the masses and led their followers to endless wars of genocide and destruction.

In Jewish tradition, we are observing the period known as the “Three Weeks” culminating in the Ninth of Ab, the day when the First and Second Temple were destroyed (as well as other sundry historical events). Our ancestors in the Second Temple believed that Rome was the personification of the Evil and Satanic Empire. Apocalyptic imagery contributed to the demise of the Jewish Commonwealth. Judaism might have disappeared altogether had it not been for moderates like Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, who showed a willingness to live in peace with the Romans.

Medieval Christianity had plenty of blood on its hands. Its internecine wars between the Catholics and the Protestants are a grim reminder of how the followers of the same religious founder, Jesus, are capable of creating unlimited mayhem and destruction—all in his name!

Hindu Kush means the “Hindu Slaughter.”  In the year 1398, Timur Khan  moved across the Yamuna River in India and captured it. He put over 100,000 captives to death. Indian historians speak of Muslim genocides resulting the deaths of nearly 100,000,000 Hindus, Buddhists, and Jainists over an 800 year period. I believe these numbers are very conservative.

Just imagine how many people the Jihadists could kill if they had nuclear bombs? Timur Khan would be envious of today’s high-tech Jihadist.

The American historian Will Durant (1885-1981)  would like the West to learn from India, tolerance and gentleness and love for all living things.

He says in the book The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage page 459:

  •  …the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within.” Almost all the Muslims of South Asia are descendants of weaker elements of the population who had succumbed to forcible Islamic conversion.
  • “The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history”. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride of the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of  Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD.  Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period. “
  • “The growth of Buddhism and monasticism in the first year of our common era sapped the manhood of India, and conspired with political division to leave India open to easy conquest. When the Arabs came, pledged to spread a simple and stoic monotheism, they looked with scorn upon the lazy, venal, miracle-mongering Buddhist monks, they smashed the monasteries, killed thousands of monks, and made monasticism unpopular with the cautious. The survivors were re-absorbed into the Hinduism that had begotten them; and eased the return of the prodigal by proclaiming Buddha a god.”

Some Islamic apologists among the West, may protest and accuse Durant—or anyone who has a dim view of Islamic military history as an “Islamophobe” may want to listen to the testimonies

As the learned and contemporary Muslim historian and Islamic jurist (Pakistan) Qazi Mughis-ud-din declared, in accordance with the teachings of the books on Canon Law:

  • The Hindus are designated in the Law as ‘payers of tribute’ (kharaj-guzar); and when the revenue officer demands silver from them, they should, without question and with all humility and respect, tender gold. If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths wide to receive it. By these acts of degradation are shown the extreme obedience of the zimmi [dhimmi], the glorification of the true faith of Islam, and the abasement of false faiths. God himself orders them to be humiliated , (as He says, ‘till they pay jaziya) with the hand and are humbled…The Prophet has commanded us to slay them, plunder them, and make them captive…No other religious authority except the great Imam (Hanifa) whose faith we follow, has sanctioned the imposition of jaziya on Hindus.

One of the most articulate spokespersons of Radical Islam is Ayatollah Khomeini. Unlike many of the Muslim apologists appearing in three-piece Armani suits, Khomeini was a real primitive and savage. His picture is on display everywhere throughout Iran. He symbolizes their vision—of a Shiite caliphate. Khomeini was an honest man—we owe him a debt of gratitude for being so direct.

  • Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole w o r l d . . . . Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless.
  • Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]?  Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy?
  •  Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.[1]

Incidentally, Mohamed Elibiary is a senior member of President Obama’s DHS advisory team and he is an admirer of Ayatollah Khomeini and a believer in the Muslim caliphate. This only goes to prove that the inmates are controlling the insane asylum—America, it is time to wake up to the Jihadist threat that is in our midst.[2]

While the Shiite and Sunni ISIS are fighting it out to see who will be King Jihadist Muslim Supreme, make no mistake about it.

Jihadism is the greatest danger the world has ever seen. If we fail to learn from history, then we will, as Santayana prophesied, be condemned to repeat it.


[1] Ibn Waraq, Why I am not a Muslim (New York: Prometheus Books, 1995), pp. 12-13.

[2] http://pamelageller.com/2014/06/obamas-dhs-senior-dhs-adviser-mohamed-elibiary-inevitable-caliphate-returns.html/

Winners, Losers, & Whiners in the Latest Israeli-Gaza Conflict

Posted on by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

By now, many of us are probably wondering: Who are the winners and losers in the Gaza conflict? The answers we shall consider, might surprise you. Some of you might think that Israel has emerged as the biggest winner. At first blush, this might seem true.

There have been very few casualties in Israel, largely due to the Iron Dome anti-missile defense. In all probability, Israel will continue tweaking this technology so that it can provide even greater coverage and protection from the onslaught of Jihadist bombs.

Thankfully, the IDF allowed its jets to pummel the Jihadists in Gaza with minimal damage to the Palestinian population. Indeed, even Israel’s critics have praised Israel’s respect for human life. This is important for many reasons; Israel’s behavior has been measured and in control; they did not respond out of passion, but with methodical and rational precision.

Sun Tzu  wisely cautioned  in his Art of War,  “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.”

From Sun Tzu’s perspective, Israel has conducted itself masterfully and effectively. More importantly, the people of Gaza have come to a dramatic change of consciousness. Whereas in the past, Gaza Palestinians felt complete loyalty to Hamas, now for the first time in recent memory, the citizens of Gaza are blaming Hamas for the destruction and mayhem of their murderous attempt to destroy Israel.

Even the Arab world has turned against Hamas and has freely offered criticism of their recklessness and shameless exploitation of their people, using them as human shields for the world to see—repeatedly.

Even before the newest round of war occurred, the people of Gaza expressed frustration with their Hamas leaders’ failed policies. In fact, the vast majority of people now oppose Hamas altogether!

As you wince reading this provocative statement, you’re probably wondering: Why haven’t we read anything about this in the newspapers? Why hasn’t MSNBC, CNN, and other media outlets reported on this?

That’s because the media is invested in perpetuating the myth that Israel is to blame for everything wrong in the Middle East.

Palestinians are not stupid people.

Following is the transcript of the video:

  • Fatima: “Where have you been, Abdullah? I waited a long time for you, and you didn’t come.”
    Abdullah: “I was on my way to Ramallah, Fatima. The roads were packed and the [Israeli] roadblock was shut and crowded. Very crowded. I tried to convince the soldiers that you were waiting for me, but it didn’t help.”
    Fatima: ” Abdullah! You’re always apologizing. While you were having a good time with her, you left me waiting a long time for you.”
    Abdullah:”You must know that I’ve never ever cheated on you. It’s the [Israeli] occupation! The occupation killed our beautiful moments together, and kept me from getting to you. Damn!”
    Fatima: ” Abdullah! You always go back to the same old excuse: The [Israeli] occupation! The occupation! The occupation! Was it the occupation that made you spend all that time with her?” — PA TV (Fatah), July 26, 2014

Here’s a better joke: How many Palestinians does it take to change a light bulb? None! They sit in the dark forever and blame the Jews for it!

RECENT POLLING  2014

According to one recent poll, 450 Palestinians were asked about the state of the current crisis. Allowing for an error of 4%, this is what they discovered.

  • 70% of the Gaza population agreed or strongly agreed that Gaza should maintain a ceasefire with Israel.
  • 57% of the people said that they preferred the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas’s position, which “officially”  renounces violence against Israel, a clear majority.
  • 73% of the Gazan population believes that their people ought to adopt “proposals for nonviolent popular resistance against the occupation.”
  • 78% of the Gazan population believes that Hamas leadership is corrupt.
  • 15% of the population supports the Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Mashal.
  • 56% of the workers would prefer to work in Israel rather than in Gaza if there was a good, high-paying job. Such a statement amounts to a desire to establish normalization with Israel, if it means they will have better lives.

WINNERS VERSUS LOSERS:

So, who are the real winners?

On the surface, it’s probably a close tie between the Gazan Palestinian people and Mahmoud Abbas.

In light of the humiliation of Hamas in the latest conflict, the world can rest assured that Hamas will most likely lose the next election—especially in light of the destruction they have brought to their communities.

Third place winner goes to Israel. The people no longer have to live in fear of being destroyed by the Palestinian bombs; Israel held its dignity and respect for human life like a badge of honor. Every American Jew should take great pride in how Israel conducted itself in this latest conflict.

Fourth place goes to Egypt and the Saudis for supporting Israel. Both of these countries recognize the dangers that Hamas poses to these relatively stable regimes.

Fifth place goes to President Obama for not interfering with Israel this time as he has before. Despite my criticism of the President in the past, I am heartened to see a different response for a change.

Who are the biggest losers?

Obviously, it’s Hamas. And let us add, Iran.

Let’s not forget the Muslim Brotherhood. Let us not forget, this particular Jihadist terror group has always been anti-Semitic and hateful toward Israel.

The Evil Empire of Jihadist Terror, a.k.a., Iran’s cynical exploitation of Palestinian hatred of Israel has succeeded in stoking the winds of war three times now. But on an optimistic note, it looks like the Palestinian people may be close to experiencing a new awakening.

The real question is: Will they taken advantage of a new and productive way of relating? Or will they succumb to the old pattern where, “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity”?

Enquiring minds want to know!