While Sharon and Abbas are busy bringing peace to our time, the jihad message of Palestinian Authority TV has not changed. Note the invocation of the example of Muhammad as a conqueror. From Palestinian Media Watch, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:
The following is the text of the Friday sermon, February 4, 2005:To view click here
Preacher Ibrahim Mudyris:
..."We tell you Palestine, we shall return to you, by Allah's will, We shall return to every village, every town, and every grain of earth which was quenched by the blood of our grandparents and the sweat of our fathers and mothers. We shall return, we shall return. Our willingness to return to the 1967 borders does not mean that we have given up on the land of Palestine. No! We ask you: Do we have the right to the 1967 borders? We have the right. Therefore, we shall realize this right with any mean it takes. We might be able to use diplomacy in order to return to the 1967 borders, but we shall not be able to use diplomacy in order to return to the 1948 borders. No one on this earth recognizes [out right to] the 1948 borders [before Israel's existence]. Therefore, we shall return to the 1967 borders, but it does not mean that we have given up on Jerusalem and Haifa, Jaffa, Lod, Ramle, Natanyah [Al-Zuhour] and Tel Aviv [Tel Al-Rabia]. Never. We shall return to every village we had been expelled from, by Allah's will. Why? All the international laws deny the Palestinians their real borders. We might agree, but in the name of Allah, our grandfathers' blood demands that we return to them [the borders]. Your father's blood was shed there, at the villages, at Ashqelon, at Ashdod, at Hirbia [a village between Gaza and Ashqelon, where Kibbutz Zikim is located today] and at others places, hundreds of villages and towns. [Their blood] demands it from us, and it shall curse anyone who will concede a grain of earth of those villages. Our approval to return to the 1967 borders is not a concession for our other rights. No!... This generation might not achieve this stage, but generations will come, and the land of Palestine...will demand that the Palestinians will return the way Muhammad returned there, as a conqueror".
Hey,Israel, build that wall. This is just a time for the PA to regroup. Peace is not on the horizon so don't let your guard down.
No..... forget about the wall, build bridges...you know it makes sense.
OT
Just HAD to post this somewhere, got it from a fellow JWer (this one's for Catherine):
"MAKES SENSE TO ME
Doctors:
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health Human Services.)
Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. Yes, 80 million.
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .000188.
Statistically, doctors are therefore ~ 909 times more lethal than gun owners.
NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must limit doctors to orthopedics before this gets completely out of hand !
The statistics on lawyers have been withheld for fear the shock would cause some people to seek medical attention.
. . . others just can't stand a tough joke."
A bridge might work if it was thought of as a connection. There is no connection here. Listen to that sermon. A bridge is only a way to get enough people in so that they can push harder from just a bit closer to the sea that they want to push Isreal into.
Build the wall.
cgw
scapels dont kill people,murderers do
There is only one sickness where a gun would be a better cure than a doctor ISLAM
Sura 2:190-193
"... Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion reigns supreme."
I'm not suprised that Israel must be destroyed.
Whether it is Abbas, or someone even more smiling, plausible, and unthreatening, who is now leading the recently-invented "Palestinian people," and whether it is Sharon or some other weary, or obstinate, or utterly foolish (Peres or a Son of Peres) Israeli, hardly matters. The relevant facts are these: Israel is entitled, by all the rules of warfare and post-war annexation of territory that have everywhere been appplied, not least in Europe, to hold on to every square inch of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. And that claim is doubly reinforced by the terms of the Mandate for Palestine, which remain in force, and which was not intended to create "two states" or a "bi-national state" but only a Jewish state, with respect for the "religious" rights of "others" (they were not, significantly, identified as "Arabs" because the non-Jewish population was by no means entirely Arab, but a real mix of Bedu, Armenians, Circassians, Europeans, as well as all sorts of Arabs a great many of whom could trace their supposed connnection to the area back no further than the late 19th (soldiers of Abd el-Kader, Mehmet Ali, Muslims from Bulgaria and the Balkans transferred by the Ottomans), and from 1890-1940, more Arabs immigrated, without any constraints, drawn by the economic activity of the Zionist settlers, into Mandatory Palestine than did Jews.
The dreamy belief that setting up a "Palestinian" state will solve anything shows a complete misunderstanding of Islam. One is not talking about the next year, or three years, or even five years, of relative calm. It is what happens after that, or in 20 years, or 50 years, that matters. If one believes that the Jews are entitled to their state, if one further believes that the Arabs have been fully provided for with 22 states where non-Arabs (Kurds, Sudanese blacks, Berbers, Copts, Maronites) must endure various degrees of persecution, from the cultural (the Berbers, who only recently obtained the right to use their own language in Algeria), to genocide (blacks in the Sudan), then that should be the starting point.
That, and a firm understanding that any further pressure or diminishment in Israel's capability will whet, not sate, Arab appetites. This goes against the Western notion of compromise. It also goes against all the smooth assurances that are now, and will be for a year or two or three, continually forthcoming.
Meanwhile, the Jihad of Da'wa and demography will continue unabated in Europe. Attention will continue to be fixed on the Middle East, which -- except for Israel and the Lebanese Christians who are not Arabs (despite that clause forced on them, with David Satterfield of the State Department acting as a beaming godfather, in the hideous Taif Agreement), when it should be devoted to learning about the teachings of Islam, and how those teachings are quite different in content from those of any other belief--system that we call a "major religion." The American government shows few signs at the top of a proper perception of Islam -- out of ignorance, out of a "we-gave-at-the-office" complacency about Islam, born of the notion that because some people were tough on the Soviet Union and unfooled by Communism, they need not subject themselves to the same rigorous study of Islam -- especially since so many, from Esposito and other hirelings, even to Bernard Lewis, who has never confronted, for personal and professional reasons, the full awfulness of Islam and who to this day will not, unlike Goitein and Rodinson, admit that he had grossly underestimated both the problem of dhimmitude and the threat to Europe (both Goitein, and Rodinson before his recent illness, had expressed their agreement with Bat Ye'or, from whom Lewis has not only kept his distance, but actively belittled her in a most unseemly and pathetic fashion -- though it is he who, in book after book, has consistently dealt in the most superficial way with dhimmitude, a word he refuses to employ). Decades of being lionized in Turkey, or in Amman, and in having to worry about the absurd likes of Esposito, have taken their toll. That is the charitable explanation.
The "Palestinian" Arabs are apparently to receive even more Western "jizya" or aid, which now will include a "pension" for "ex"terrorists. Those among the American taxpayers who do not have any pensions coming, may beg to differ with this brilliant strategy.
And there is more. The American government will apparently keep throwing money(not to mention the lives of its soldiers), more hundreds of billions, at Iraq, when it should be leaving and care not one whit if the Sunni and Shi'a make an arrangement or do not (the Kurds are a slightly different matter, becuase any encouragement of non-Arab Muslims to find vehicles to express their resentment of Arab supremacist ideology within Islam should be encouraged -- and that goes for non-Arab Muslims in Asia and Africa as well).
Congress must demand that someone, somewhere, stasrt learning about Islam. Emphasis on learning "the language" is misplaced for two reasons. First, 80% of the world's Muslims do not know Arabic; it is not necessary to know it; the Qur'an, in many translations that can be synoptically compared on-line (www.usc.edu), and the Hadith, and the main elements in the Sira, are all available in English. Second, language training itself, if conducted by Arab Muslims or those close to them, can be a clever way to indoctrinate the innocent students, and to "make them see" (with liquid brown eyes, and anguished looks, and sly insertion of little political lessons in the midst of what is supposed to be a strictly apolitical session of grammar or vocabulary-building) the "Arab and Muslim" point of view. Soldiers and government employees are dealing with past masters of propaganda and taqiyya; they would be as helpless, most of them, as the most innnocent schoolgirl enrolled in Joseph Massad's introductory class at Columbia, or some eager freshman being indoctrinated in a world-view by Ward Churchill, or Omid Safi, or any of a number of interchangeable rashidis and dabashis, calibans replacing quasi-prosperos (when we should be minding our P's and Q's) all over the archipelago of academic America.
Why am I not surprised? This is another fine example of the ROP ® at work!
Hey,Israel, build that wall. This is just a time for the PA to regroup. Peace is not on the horizon so don't let your guard down.
Posted by: misskitty at February 9, 2005 08:02 AM
No..... forget about the wall, build bridges...you know it makes sense.
Posted by: Naseem at February 9, 2005 08:36 AM
Naseem:
Why would anyone in their right mind build a bridge to someone whose clearly sworn duty is to destroy you? Are you so completely and thoroughly indoctrinated that you cannot accept the existence of any faith other than Islam? If so, then you are at odds with nearly 80% of the planet's population, who do not think that Islam is the only way of life and that Mohammed's example is the one to aspire to.
"Goal is Israel's destruction"- WE know that.
Israel knows that. I don't think Sharon will sell out Israel.
I'm not sure whether the Bush administration is selling out Israel.
We will see how long it takes before the suicide bombers, the rockets, the murders of Israelis start again before Israel puts an end to it:
Only the reality on the ground will drive the message home to the phallustinios that Israel can not be overrun, is not for the taking.
But for the US administration to throw hundreds of millions to the swine who are our mortal enemy, who never produced anything useful and breed like rats for the Jihad, I say this: Poor policy, poor understanding, wrong message, foolish generosity.
Better sent enough cement and steel to build a better wall to Israel!
A DRAW BRIDGE COMES TO MIND
Today some harsh words from Condy to Iran, no nukes.
We should take the initiative of an all out assault on islam every where in the world, we have low level nukes to make the point.
"will demand that the Palestinians will return the way Muhammad returned there, as a conqueror".
Please correct me if I am wrong,but there was no
Palestine when Muhammad was alive,and he only dreamt he went to Jerusalem
Build the wall,and let the palis,like Muhammed dream.
If you are a Muslim, then you believe that Muhammad made his "Night Journey" or Miraj from the top of what non-Muslims know as the Temple Mount. Though Jerusalem is mentioned nowhere in the Qur'an, the Umayyad Caliph who wanted to claim Jerusalem, the city holy to Jews and Christians, for Islam,and for precisely that reason, because Islam had to appropriate the holy sites of prior religions just as it did the prophets, and the stories(in new versions) of the prior two monotheisms whose adherents lived, richer, more numerous, and more advanced, in the very lands the formerly pagan, now islamized Arab tribes (who did not "ride out of the desert with Qur'an in one hand and sword in another" for they had already been living outside the Arabian peninsula, and somehow, probably in the 8th rather than the 7th century, took a mishmash of pagan Arab lore, and stories and doctrines from the earlier monotheisms)managed to conquer.
The Umayyad caliph (who had a role in the development of early Islam) decided that the "farthest mosque" mentioned in the Qur'an, from which Muhammad made his "Night Journey" up to the seventh heaven and back, all within 24 hours, must have been situated on the Temple Mount. Other early Muslims disputed where that "Night Journey" might have been made, but it surely made geopolitical sense -- and Islam is a geopolitical doctrine and plan -- to fix the site at Jerusalem.
Whether the building now called the Dome of the Rock was originally a Byzantine martyrium subsequently claimed for Islam, or whether it was an Islamic structure from its inception, is subject to further investigation, and perhaps there are techniques similar to carbon dating that may give a date, and offer guides for further lines of inquiry. The Mosque of Omar, on the other hand, clearly was built as an Islamic structure, but there too conventional dating needs to be re-examined.
Most Western scholars of Islamic art (e.g., Ettinghausen, Grabar), while not being Muslims themselves, were long content to accept the Muslim view of the origins of the Qur'an, and of its philology, just as before Goldziher no Western scholar really questioned the authenticity, or origins, of the Hadith. St. Clair Tisdall and others began to consider the origins of the Qur'an in Jewish and Christian texts. And, following John Wansbrough an American scholar who worked in England, others -- notably Michael Cook and Patricia Crone in the still un-reprinted "Hagarism" -- have begun to study Islam not within the strict confines of Islamic belief, but outside such restraints, as scholars determined to apply the same methods, and rigor, that scholars in the West applied to the sutdy Christianity and Judaism, including the historical Jesus, beginning in the 19th century. And now they have been joined by Christoph Luxenberg, a student of philology, whose "syro-aramaic" reading of the Qur'an presents a plausible understanding of hitherto-incomprehensible passages in the Qur'an. Muslims by and large simply will not hear of such studies. Even Western self-appointed Defenders of the Faith (including Angelika Neuwirth, a German scholar who converted to Islam, and while she has "moved on" to Greek orthodoxy, her sons remain Muslim) have tried furiously, but lagey unsuccessfully, to punch holes in the learned and implacable Luxenberg. As the techniques and criteria of modern scholarship continue to employed in straightforward fashion, the history of the early Qur'an is likely to be seen in a new light, at least by non-Muslims -- as will be the early history of Islamic conquest. One wonders if the most educated and enlightened of Muslims will manage to tolerate the same study of their faith that Christians and Jews (and Hindus and Buddhists) have all tolerated, or whether the belief-system of Islam will prove too brittle to endure such study.
The Dome of the Rock brings to mind the Taj Mahal
Gaza shell attack shatters ceasefire
PALESTINIAN militants fired a barrage of mortar shells at a Jewish settlement in the southern Gaza Strip early today, in the first serious breach of the ceasefire declared at a Red Sea summit.
Around 25 mortar shells were aimed at the settlement, and 13 exploded inside the perimeter. There were no casualties.
Hamas said it carried out the attacks to avenge the death of a Palestinian man shot in Gaza yesterday.
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has been working to prevent attacks by militants on Israel and planned to head to Gaza today to discuss the ceasefire with leaders of armed groups.
Mr Abbas insists that all the militant groups have signed up for the truce. Hamas, however, said from the beginning that it was not bound by the ceasefire.
The attack came as Israel declared some relaxing of restrictions as part of the truce.
Why is it that Naseem never seems to have anything to say when Hugh weighs in with historic facts?
NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must limit doctors to orthopedics before this gets completely out of hand !
The statistics on lawyers have been withheld for fear the shock would cause some people to seek medical attention.
. . . others just can't stand a tough joke."
Posted by: CGW at February 9, 2005 08:42 AM
Gold Star For you today!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage to stay the course to Destroy ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Threat and give the World Courage to Stand Up and Fight this Evil Amen
NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
Posted by: CGW at February 9, 2005 08:42 AM
In the case of Muslim medical students and doctors who are members/adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood, guns do kill people, especially when they are in the hands of jihadist doctors.