Israeli police clash with Palestinians at Al-Aqsa mosque

Israeli police fired tear-gas and stun grenades on Sunday to disperse some 150 Palestinians who began hurling stones as foreign tourists visited a sensitive religious site in the Old City.

Nine policemen were hurt, a police spokesman said, and doctors said 13 Palestinians were treated for injuries after the clash at the Al-Aqsa mosque compound, a site revered by Muslims and Jews that has been a major faultine in the Middle East conflict.

Protesters threw stones and chairs as riot police rushed to the scene. Video showed them trying to drive police away from the doorway of the mosque, but there was no sign that police ever entered it during the clash.

One witness said police told him religious Palestinians at the holy site were angry over what they considered the immodest dress of some of the tourists, and grew violent after police ignored their complaints.

The disturbance occurred a few hours before the start of Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement, in the complex known to Jews as the Temple Mount and to Muslims as al-Harm al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary).

Police restored calm and closed the complex, which is the size of a large city square. It includes al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, and the Dome of the Rock, above the Jewish prayer site at the Western Wall.

Jewish visitors require special permission from Israeli police to visit the site and usually do so under guard. Israel also restricts access by Palestinian Muslim men under 50.

Temple Mount is the most sacred site in Judaism. The gilded Dome of the Rock sits over the spot where Jews and Christians believe Abraham was about to sacrifice his son Isaac to God before an angel stayed his hand.

In Muslim tradition, Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven from the rock at the centre of what is now the Dome of the Rock. Al-Haram al-Sharif is the third holiest site for Muslims after Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.

Ahmadinejad did not cross EU ‘red line’ with UN speech, says Sweden (EU presidency)

H/T Gates of Vienna:

Sweden, Finland and non-EU Norway stayed in the room when Ahmadinejad spoke: EJPRESS

0ec79aa8-ebb7-466f-8671-068ed2b9491f.bmp

Sweden, Finland and non-EU Norway stayed in the room when Ahmadinejad spoke
by: AFP and EJP     Updated: 24/Sep/2009 15:10
Cecilia Julin, Swedish foreign ministry spokeswoman: “We’re not commenting on who left or who didn’t leave. I think there were other reasons for other countries that decided to leave.”

STOCKHOLM (AFP-EJP)—Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not cross the “red line” that would have prompted a walkout by all EU states in his speech at the United Nations, the Swedish foreign ministry said Thursday.
“There were certain criteria set for when the EU would leave the room and those criteria were not fulfilled,” spokeswoman Cecilia Julin said.

Sweden currently holds the rotating EU presidency.

The criteria agreed in New York before the Iranian leader spoke included denying the Holocaust and calling for the annihilation of Israel, which Ahmadinejad avoided doing this time.

Even so, a number of EU states did walk out when Ahmadinejad attacked Israel, including Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary and Italy.

“We’re not commenting on who left or who didn’t leave,” Julin said. “I think there were other reasons for other countries that decided to leave.”

In his address, Ahmadinejad again took aim at Israel but without mentioning the country or Jews by name, referring only to the “Zionist regime.”

He accused Israel of “inhumane policies in Palestine,” including genocide, and seeking to “establish a new form of slavery, and harm the reputation of other nations, even European nations and the US, to attain its racist ambitions.”

Suggesting there was a Jewish conspiracy, Ahmadinejad added: “It is no longer acceptable that a small minority would dominate the politics, economy and culture of major parts of the world by its complicated networks.”

He accused Jews of seeking to “establish a new form of slavery, and harm the reputation of other nations, even European nations and the US, to attain its racist ambitions.”

Israel had called for a boycott of the speech, and was not present when the Iranian leader spoke.

Canada heeded the boycott call, while delegations from Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, New Zealand and the United States also left the room as Ahmadinejad began to rail against Israel, a European source said.

Earlier this week, the European Union presidency issued a statement condemning Ahmadinejad for his statements on the Holocaust and on Israel, saying such remarks “encourage anti-Semitism and hatred”.

Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to the UN

When raw basic factual historical truth is on the defense, the secular civilized world cannot count on it’s survival.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0YG12KQ-as

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqvE8Kqhw2k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnRbW0p9LoM

H/T Solstace

Arabs set fire to Israeli village during Rosh HaShanah

From Arutz Sheva/IsraelNationalNews

Holiday Arson Leaves Samaria Families Homeless

by Maayana Miskin

(IsraelNN.com) As the Jews of Havat Gilad in Samaria celebrated the second day of Rosh HaShanah on Sunday afternoon, a group of Arabs from a nearby village infiltrated the town and set fire to the area. Contrary to media reports, a house was burnt down, and the holiday ended with an emergency evacuation, several wounded residents, and two families left homeless.

Police arrested four Arab suspects near the scene of the crime. Continue Reading →

Melanie Phillips gives very important speech.

Pay attention please anyone who thinks what happened in the UK cannot or will not happen ‘here’, it can and it is. Obama’s policies are nearly identical to the U.K. Obama has decided to call Islamic jihad and terrorism ‘man made disasters’ mirroring the British policies described herein. H/T Solstace

Ahmadinejad: Israel ‘will not last long’, Holocaust a ‘lie’

imadinnerjacketAt an annual anti-Israel rally, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeated his belief that the Holocaust was a ‘lie’ and said that Israel ‘would not last long.’ His comments come ahead of a meeting with the U.S. on Iran’s nuclear program.
Ahead of an October 1 meeting with the U.S. to discuss Iran’s nuclear program, among other topics, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attended an annual anti-Israel rally in Tehran on Friday – vowing that Israel “will not last long.” Ahmadinejad also reiterated his long-standing belief Holocaust was not real – that it was more of a manipulation, or a “pretext,” to allow for the establishment of Israel as it is known today. “It is a lie based on an unprovable and mythical claim,” he said, according to Reuters. Ahmadinejad has been making similar statements on the topic of the Holocaust since his election to office in 2005, and he has received significant international criticism for the remarks. His renewed comments come at a delicate time, as Western nations continue to suspect Iran of building nuclear weapons – and Israel openly demonstrates its willingness to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

Holocaust a myth – Iranian leader

From correspondents in Tehran, Iran: News.com.au

September 18, 2009 06:44pm
IRANIAN President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the Holocaust was a “myth” as he addressed the annual Quds Day rally in Tehran today, reiterating comments that sparked outrage around the world.

“The very existence of this regime is an insult to the dignity of the people,” the hardliner said referring to arch-foe Israel.

“They (Western powers) launched the myth of the Holocaust. They lied, they put on a show and then they support the Jews.

“If as you claim the Holocaust is true, why can a study not be allowed?” the Iranian president said to chants of “Death to Israel” from the crowd gathered for the annual display of solidarity with the Palestinians.

“The pretext for establishing the Zionist regime is a lie … a lie which relies on an unreliable claim, a mythical claim, and the occupation of Palestine has nothing to do with the Holocaust,” he said.
“This claim is corrupt and the pretext is corrupt.”

Symetrical respect?

You have to be living in a cave in Afghanistan somewhere to not know what happens if you ‘disrespect’ or ‘desecrate’ a Muslim holy symbol by now and frankly, if you do live in that cave chances are good you actually caused the riots, arson, murder, and general destruction that result from the mere rumour of a desecration of a Koran or a cartoon or whatnot.

But what happens when Muslims publicly desecrate symbols of other people’s faiths?

Lets have a look….

Muslims stomping on head of Hindu Sacred Cow

Muslims stomping on head of Hindu Sacred Cow

Here, some Muslims in India show their multicultural tolerance and respect for the Hindu’s, by stomping on the head of a cow, a sacred animal to them. This also teaches us the profound empathy and kindness Muslims show to animals.

Below, we see the Muslim tolerance and appreciation for art, and antiquities as well as the sensitivities of other faiths.

Taliban blows the head off one of the ancient Bamiyan Buddha statues

Taliban blows the head off one of the ancient Bamiyan Buddha statues

Yeah yeah you have seen this before. It’s old news right? Well the point is, we, the non Muslims people of the world had better wake up and recognize that this and other events like it, are not isolated incidents by ‘extremist’ or ‘radical’ variants of Islam. This is in fact how Islam itself demands that evidence of other faiths be treated. More simply put, This is policy.

Evidence of blasting of Jewish artifacts from the Temple Mount

Evidence of blasting of Jewish artifacts from the Temple Mount

For the story on the above photo please visit WND. however this one is probably the least important example of the Islamic overt systematic actions to destroy any historical evidence of Jewish existence in the area of Israel whatsoever. There is plenty of footage online showing actual crushing machines with conveyor belts destroying whatever is dug up in Gaza that shows Jewish history as well as in the Muslim area near the Western Wall.

Muslims wage war on history itself if it in any way runs against how Mohamed specified the world has to be.

he sensitivities run deep. Archaeologists are cautioned not to talk about pre-Islamic finds outside scholarly literature. Few ancient treasures are on display, and no Christian or Jewish relics. A 4th or 5th century church in eastern Saudi Arabia has been fenced off ever since its accidental discovery 20 years ago and its exact whereabouts kept secret.

In the eyes of conservatives, the land where Islam was founded and the Prophet Muhammad was born must remain purely Muslim. Saudi Arabia bans public displays of crosses and churches, and whenever non-Islamic artifacts are excavated, the news must be kept low-key lest hard-liners destroy the finds.

“They should be left in the ground,” said Sheikh Mohammed al-Nujaimi, a well-known cleric, reflecting the views of many religious leaders. “Any ruins belonging to non-Muslims should not be touched. Leave them in place, the way they have been for thousands of years.”

In an interview, he said Christians and Jews might claim discoveries of relics, and that Muslims would be angered if ancient symbols of other religions went on show. “How can crosses be displayed when Islam doesn’t recognize that Christ was crucified?” said al-Nujaimi. “If we display them, it’s as if we recognize the crucifixion.”

As for Christians?

Another Church turned into public toilet.

Or set one on fire:

Perhaps the time to wake up from fantasies that if you are nice to all, all will be nice to you. Reality offers you this axiom.

The longer you wait to solve a problem, the more costly and unpleasant will be the fix until you wait so long there is no fix and the problem overwhelms you.

The time for a bloodless solution, a political one, may not have passed yet. But that political solution must happen right away.

Eeyore for Vlad.

Israel: Threat Warning Issued For India

Israel: Threat Warning Issued For India

September 17, 2009
Israel’s Counter-Terrorism Bureau at the National Security Council issued Sept. 17 an “imminent and concrete” threat warning for India, placing emphasis on the Jammu and Kashmir region, The Jerusalem Post reported. The bureau’s warning said a Pakistani militant organization associated with al Qaeda is planning to conduct several major attacks throughout India. The warning added that all Westerners in India are possible targets but that Israelis and locations where they gather are in greater danger.

UN Watch and National Post on Naomi Klein

From U.N. watch:

in the space of two weeks, anti-globalization activist and best-selling author Naomi Klein, the preeminent figure of the radical left, published a lengthy essay justifying the U.N.’s disastrous Durban II racism conference, and helped organize a boycott of this week’s Toronto International Film Festival — for the crime of showing Israeli films. The New York Times reports that celebrities who signed Klein’s boycott letter include Harry Belafonte, Viggo Mortensen and Julie Christie. However, Jerry Seinfeld, Natalie Portman, Sacha Baron Cohen, Lisa Kudrow, Patricia Heaton and Lenny Kravtiz countered with an ad supporting inclusion of Israeli films, and opposing blacklists. While Jane Fonda initially joined Klein’s boycott, she has now apologized for endorsing its “inflammatory” words.

The following editorial by UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, in today’s National Post of Canada, exposes Naomi Klein’s irrational rage — and reveals an ugly episode from her past that she has been carefully hiding.

National Post

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

The strange, enduring rage of Naomi Klein

When it comes to Israel, she has always acted out of intense emotion, hysteria and anger

Hillel Neuer,  National Post

Abbas Momani, AFP, Getty Images
Naomi Klein attends a Palestinian boycott in the West Bank village of Bilin, near Ramallah, in June.

GENEVA — Supporters of liberal democratic values may have a hard time understanding why anti-globalization activist Naomi Klein has recruited Jane Fonda and other stars to boycott the Toronto International Film Festival for the crime of showing films from Tel Aviv, a symbol of tolerance in a region of tyranny.

Klein has never called for a boycott of films or any other products from the dozens of Arab and Islamic countries that systematically subjugate their women, torture dissidents and persecute religious and ethnic minorities.

She was not moved to protest when the city of Toronto twinned with Chongqing, nor when it established a “friendship relationship” with Ho Chi Minh City, despite the widespread human rights abuses in both China and Vietnam.

Nor has she ever called for the boycotting of films from the many Western democracies, including Canada, whose soldiers are fighting Islamist terrorists in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Klein’s singling out of Israel — particularly its most liberal city and cultural sector — has no rational basis.

This should come as no surprise. For while Klein’s statements and writings on Israel pose as sober analysis, the truth is that she has always acted on this subject out of intense emotion, hysteria and anger, rather than rational thought, facts or logic. Continue Reading →

Israel responds to Swedish blood libel.

h/t to Tundra Tabloid for this most excellent news feature

from the TT:

Norway is following Swedens Antisemitic lead. The Norwegian governments pension fund just sold its stock in Israels Elbit defense contractor due to Elbits provision of electronic monitors for the separation fence.
This latest move seems to be part of a general trend towards anti-Semitism in Scandinavia in the aftermath of the publication of the anti-Semitic blood libel in Swedens Aftonblodet mass circulation tabloid last month. Latma studios host once again the Swedish Foreign Minister “Jorgen Jorgensen”.

Three Left Wing Myths About Israel (with an extra bonus myth!)

This essay by Sultan Knish: H/T Solstace reposted with permission of the good sultan with thanks.

Myth 1: “Israel was created because Europe felt guilty about the Holocaust.”
This left wing myth has been widely repeated, most recently by Desmond Tutu. While blatantly false on a level that even the most serious anti-Israel historian can recognize, it persists because its function is to delegitimize as the product of post-war colonial guilt, rather than longstanding Israeli national aspirations.

Israel was not created in 1947. By 1947, Israel already was a functioning country with a language, culture, agriculture, universities, newspapers and military forces which proved capable of defending against the armies of several Arab nations. The only thing that happened after the Holocaust was a UN vote in 1947 was for a partition plan that was never implemented because the Arab world instead chose to try and destroy Israel. Israel however would have declared independence and fought for its own survival, with the same exact outcome, regardless of UN Resolution 181. This vote is often described as creating Israel, but it was more accurately an attempt to settle the borders of Israel that failed because of Arab genocidal hostility that expressed itself not only toward Israel, but toward the Jews living in Arab lands.

Nor did post-war European colonialism create Israel. Britain, which was the colonial power in the region, was against Israel’s independence and abstained in the UN vote. The majority of votes for Resolution 181 came from non-European countries, primarily in Latin America and Eastern Europe, such as Bolivia, Brazil, Panama, Peru and Poland, Ukraine and the Soviet Union. 7 European countries voted Yes, most of them Northern European states such as Sweden and Denmark, which experienced only a limited impact of the Holocaust. 12 Latin American countries voted Yes. Twice the number. And all of them countries that had their own national aspirations and had fought against colonialism.

Post-Holocaust guilt was not the reason Resolution 181 passed. Less than a third of the 33 votes came from countries where the Holocaust had taken place. The reasons were varied and different. Some Latin American countries identified with Israel’s national aspirations and some sought economic ties. Truman was influenced by the desire for Jewish votes in an upcoming election. The Soviet Union wanted to sabotage Britain’s colonial program. The motives of different countries were varied and complex. Iran for example voted against the resolution and yet became the second country to recognize the new State of Israel.

Left wing activists may insist that Resolution 181 was a racist act, but in fact half the countries who voted for it were non-white, and most of the countries who voted for it were non-European. Therefore the myth that Israel was created after the Holocaust by guilty Europeans, a myth that has been bandied about by everyone from Desmond Tutu to Wallace Shawn to Barack Obama is just that, a myth. Israel would have existed regardless of the Holocaust or UN Resolution 181, which was voted for primarily by non-European countries in any case. Those who repeat the myth are therefore demonstrating either extreme ignorance or extreme deceptiveness.
Myth 2: “European Nations Gave the Jews a Land Already Inhabited by a People.”
This is one of the more common myths that seeks to strike at the legitimacy of the creation of the modern state of Israel, and treats the Jews as a foreign body within the land. This is a continuation of the anti-semitic stereotypes of the Jews as eternal wanderers and eternal foreigners.

The fact of the matter is that Jews had an ongoing presence in the land going back thousands of years, that was only interrupted by massacres and expulsions, after which the Jews population would once again attempt to reestablish itself. Greek, Roman, Arab and Ottoman colonialism expelled Jewish populations and attempted to replace them with their own populations in order to gain a foothold in the land. Unlike them however the Jews remained the land’s indigenous population. Continue Reading →

Syria losing influence with Hizbolah, no point in making peace deal with Israel

Top defense official: Syria losing clout over ‘Hezbollahstan’

Syria may not be able to curb Lebanon’s Hezbollah guerrillas, a senior Israeli defense official said on Tuesday, casting doubt on the feasibility of a long-standing Israeli condition for a peace deal with Damascus.

Syria, which pursued indirect negotiations with Israel last year, rejected the demand that it distance itself from Hezbollah and Iran. Syria, for its part, wants an Israeli undertaking to return the Golan Heights. Israel has balked at this.

Amos Gilad, a top adviser to Defense Minister Ehud Barak, told an international security conference at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center that Iran’s influence over Shi’ite Hezbollah appeared to be far greater than that of neighboring Syria.

“Hezbollah is an entity. ‘Hezbollahstan’ is much more powerful than Lebanon itself,” Gilad said, according to an official transcript of his speech in English. “If Iran gets the nuclear [bomb], for sure it’ll be more significant.”

“In the past, we could have packaged [a] deal with Syria that could include the terror in Lebanon, because the Syrians had their ways of convincing the Hezbollah to give up terror if they had the intention to do it,” Gilad said.

“Now ‘Hezbollahstan’ is so powerful, I’m not sure Syria could deliver this.”

Hezbollah was set up with the help of Iranian revolutionary Guards to fight Israeli forces that had invaded Lebanon in 1982. Hezbollah still has strong support from Tehran.

Does god hate women? An excellent piece by Nick Cohen

BURKA_MAIN
Burka-clad women walk in the old city of Kabul (AFP/Getty)

A while ago, a BBC producer phoned to tell me I had written a “controversial” book. I knew that already, and gathered from the teeth-sucking sound coming down the line that she did not approve.

“So,” she continued, “we’ve lined up four guests to argue against you.”

I told her to go away — maybe I used a stronger term — and then thought about her predicament. As a biased broadcaster, she wanted to hear my book denounced, but she could not risk organising a one-on-one debate. Maybe I would have come out on top. More probably, some listeners would have agreed with me, others with my opponent, as is the normal way of things. By arranging her show to make it four against one, however, she could maintain the illusion of impartiality while creating the impression in listeners’ mind that the consensus was overwhelmingly against arguments she found uncomfortable. In the interests of “balance” and of letting “everyone have their say”, she would fill 80 per cent of the airtime with advocates of her own political position. I have watched out for rigged debates ever since. They are the surest signal the BBC dares send that an idea does not deserve a hearing in polite society.

Ophelia Benson did not quite get the four-on-one treatment when she appeared on Radio 3’s cultural talk show Nightwaves to discuss a “controversial” book she has co-authored with Jeremy Stangroom. They gave her a mere two opponents, and the presenter tried to be fair. Still, when one adversary stopped disparaging her, the other started, as the BBC flashed warning signs to listeners to ignore her.

If they missed the point, the press banged it home. The Independent denounced Benson and Stangroom “as inflammatory in the extreme”; authors who produce “torrents of invective” and “show no desire to go beyond name-calling and distortion.” The Guardian accused them of “crudeness and lack of insight”. It was “staggered anyone wanted to publish” them, and concluded that only a base desire to make money could explain the release of a “profoundly intellectually dishonest”, “hysterical” and “bizarre” work. My own newspaper, the Observer, was slightly more temperate, but not so the casual reader would notice. Benson and Stangroom were not original thinkers but had “trawled through newspaper articles”. They “splutter with righteous anger”, their style “clunky”, “hammering” and “repetitive”, their arguments “flimsy” and “deadening”.

Readers who imagine that Benson and Stangroom were on the receiving end of the fullest stomach-load of bile literary London has brought up this year because they were making the case for white supremacy or the return of the death penalty do not understand the dark turn Western thought took between the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Benson and Stangroom’s book is Does God Hate Women?, which the predecessors of today’s critics would have hailed as a feminist classic.

“So does God hate women?” it asks.

Well, what can one say. Religious authorities and conservative clerics worship a wretchedly cruel unjust vindictive executioner of a God. They worship a God of 10-year-old boys, a God of playground bullies, a God of rapists, of gangs, of pimps. They worship — despite rhetoric about justice and compassion — a God who sides with the strong against the weak, a God who cheers for privilege and punishes egalitarianism. They worship a God who is  a male and who gangs up with other males against women. They worship a thug. They worship a God who thinks little girls should be married to grown men. They worship a God who looks on in approval when a grown man rapes a child because he is “married” to her. They worship a God who thinks a woman should receive 80 lashes with a whip because her hair wasn’t completely covered. They worship a God who is pleased when three brothers hack their sisters to death with axes because one of them married without their father’s permission.

Please go to Standpoint Mag to read the rest of this excellent article.

Virgin Mary painted as female Palestinian suicide bombers

From the Jerusalem Post/Israel.jpost.com

Sept 4, 2009 0:20 | Updated Sept 5, 2009 8:09

‘Female bomber’ exhibit sparks fury in Tel Aviv

By ABE SELIG

An art exhibit depicting various female Palestinian suicide bombers as the Virgin Mary holding baby Jesus, which opened at the Sokolov House press center in Tel Aviv on Thursday, was quickly taken down following an outcry from the families of those killed or wounded in the attacks, as well as by organizations that represent terror victims.

Paiting of suicide bomber...

Paiting of suicide bomber shown at Sokholov House.
Photo: AP

SLIDESHOW: Israel & Region |  World

The exhibit, which featured the work of artists Galina Bleich and Liliah Check, consisted of a series of paintings of the women – some with halos around their heads – rendered to look like Renaissance-era portraits of Catholic saints.

Sokolov House agreed to take the portraits down on Thursday afternoon, but another section of the exhibit – sand and dirt that had been taken from the scenes of the bombings and spread out across canvas – remained on the gallery’s walls.

The artists defended their work on Thursday, but the victims’ families expressed outrage over both the content of the exhibition and the fact that Sokolov House, the headquarters of the Israeli Journalists Association, had agreed to show it.

Dalit Levy, whose 17-year-old stepdaughter Rachel was killed in a suicide bombing as she shopped at the Supersol supermarket in Jerusalem’s Kiryat Hayovel neighborhood on March 29, 2002, along with the store’s security guard, Haim Smadar, 55, arrived outside Sokolov House on Thursday afternoon with an Israeli flag draped over her shoulders, and placed plastic sheeting on the sidewalk.

“You want art?” she asked a group of reporters who had gathered around her. “Here’s art!” she said, before spilling a can of red paint next to a photograph of her stepdaughter and two memorial candles. “This is the blood of our children!”

Almagor, The Association for Terror Victims in Israel, also issued a stern response to the exhibit, and threatened to take legal action if the portraits were not taken down.

“Nahum Sokolov [for whom Sokolov House is named] is rolling in his grave today,” said Almagor’s chairman, Meir Indor.

“We’ve contacted the attorney-general and asked him to take legal action against the exhibition’s representatives,” he added. “Any action that strengthens or praises the murderous acts of terrorism is violating the law and hurting the general public by legitimizing the murders.”

Indor said his group was worried the artists would try to show the exhibit elsewhere.

“We’ve been in contact with the artists, and made it clear that we want them to add information to the material so that people will understand that this is not promoting terrorism, but against it,” he said.

“But at this point it’s unclear if they are willing to agree to that. As it stands, if they continue to show the work the way it is now, we will obviously continue our struggle against it.”