More Uranium Reportedly Found in Iran

"Sorry, Mahmoud, that really is just 'yellow cake.' Now eat your dessert and wash up for prayers."

BILL WILSON/MONTANA NEWS: To rebuild its once-powerful military, Russia is well into a strategy to raise money by arming and equipping counterbalances to the United States by selling weapons, nuclear capable missiles and nuclear technology to North Korea, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and, yes, even China, all enemies of either the United States and Israel. Bible prophecy is clear that a powerful nation from the North of Israel will bring the nations of Northern Africa and Persia against the nation of Israel which will launch the Great Tribulation and the rise of the anti-Christ. This battle is characterized in Ezekiel 38. In verse 16, the Lord says, “And you shall come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring you against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in you, O Gog, before their eyes.” “Gog,” by most accounts, is Russia. And God’s hook appears to be already in Russia’s jaw. Putin’s words and actions are proof. But do not fear because redemption is near.

I wonder if the traces were found in some sort of a dual use facility that makes pharmacuticals or baby formula...HMMM?

Do you suppose this has anything to do with the constant drum beat we hear about there being no WMD's found in Iraq, so any effort to find WMD in a err...peaceful nuclear technology development progam for electrical generation only would be thwarted? Or am I too suspicious of Iranian intentions?

It has been known for some time that Iran has distributed its nuclear program through out the country to avoid detection and destruction. All that has paid off for them if they have achieved weapons grade uranium. And for the West we may have just slipped past the eleventh hour into countdown mode...

http://www.thebulletin.org/doomsday_clock/current_time.htm

tgusa

I checked out that link. The date of the article is February 27, 2002. Did someone forget to wind the clock?

"adding to concerns that Tehran was hiding activities aimed at making nuclear arms"

OF COURSE THEY'RE HIDING THEIR ACTIVITIES -- WATCH WHAT THEY "DO", NOT WHAT THEY "SAY"!!!!!

On April 12, 2006, Joseph Cirincione, "Director for Non-Proliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace" said Iran was 4-5 years from producing weapons-grade enriched uranium.

On April 13, 2006, Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation said Iran was 16 days away.

29 days later we're starting to find it. I hope Mr. Cirincione's official Middle East Expert (tm) credentials have been revoked, however temporarily. And where does Carnegie get their funding from?

The clock is either 6 minutes slow or being run by a dhimmi.

tgusa

Did they send all their Cesium to Iran?

ShortBoard Surfer..LOL

tgusa said

The clock is either 6 minutes slow or being run by a dhimmi.

Reading the article, it is talking about the danger of the U.S. and Russian weapons. In one sentence, they mention in passing that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are seeking nuclear weapons (and it then tells us how North Korea is willing to negotiate if we would just stop being so belligerent towards them).

Uhh, I gotta go with (b), "run by a dhimmi".

In one sentence, they mention in passing that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are seeking nuclear weapons (and it then tells us how North Korea is willing to negotiate if we would just stop being so belligerent towards them).

It really is unbelieveable that these people are supposed to have a working human brain.

yes john kerry you are right,russia will save the world........ Abu Mazen to Meet With Russian President Putin

(IsraelNN.com) Palestinian Authority (PA) leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is scheduled to meet next week with Russian President Vladimir Putin, reportedly to raise pressing issues pertaining to the fiscal crisis in the PA.

While visiting in Moscow, Abu Mazen is expected to request financial aid from the Russian leader.

Does it ever occur to these people to question what Iran is doing with all that uranium isotope 238 that's left after separating out the isotope 235? The stuff that makes up a little over 97% of the uranium pulled out of the ground? The stuff that is used in a breeder reactor to make PLUTONIUM?

Apparently not.

When Pakistan, India, and North Korea produced their first weapons, they did a test detonation to notify the world that it was too late, a fait accompli, a done deal, and they now have the ability to retaliate with WMD's if anyone tried to interfere.

I wonder why Iran has not, yet. Did their provocative statements get ahead of their production capabilities? Or do they have something else in mind for a test detonation?

It's too bad that Bush has said that it is not feasible to search all the cargo containers coming into the U.S. I have a feeling that a certain shipment coming from Iran may contain something other than olives and hummus.

BTW, Hugh has been quiet of late. Is he on a well-deserved vacation (are there many sunny beaches in Undisclosedville)? Or a clandestine assignment, perhaps?

storeagemanager l often hear about that end of times sceneario, with the good guys winning in the end.. but lots are going to die. scary though, you can see how the countries line up for this big one.

traces of highly enriched uranium

Hmmm, now let me see.

U238 is naturally occuring but is not capable of sustaining fission and only 0.72% of the isotopes that can sustain fisson are the U235 variety needed for...er...."peaceful" purposes.

Highly enriched Uranium means that about 20% of the mass of the Uranium on hand is made up of the relatively rare U235 stuff -- and that is only possible through isotope separation.

A very expensive and difficult achievement to say the least.

Put another way, 99.28% of Uranium is U238 and won't sustain fission. (Otherwise, naturally occuring mushroom clouds would rise up all over the planet being initiated by thermal energy alone)

But they said the density of enrichment appeared to be close to or above the level used to make nuclear warheads.

Therefore, do you suppose that there is a possiblilty that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program?

As is obvious to the most casual observer, the answer to that question is an emphatic -- nahhh, it couldn't be!

I have not read any news so frightening in years.

chsw

Special_Guest says

It's too bad that Bush has said that it is not feasible to search all the cargo containers coming into the U.S. I have a feeling that a certain shipment coming from Iran may contain something other than olives and hummus

I just read on Drudge that Pres Bush may use the National Guard on the borders. STOP THAT ILLEGAL HUMMUS !!!!

chsw,
Boy do I long for the good old days when all I had to worry about was 1000 or so Soviet warheads targeted in my general direction.

chsw,
Boy do I long for the good old days when all I had to worry about was 1000 or so Soviet warheads targeted in my general direction

Me too. At least the Soviets weren't eager to die in a nuclear war that they initiated.

Those good old days when your enemies were sane -- are over.

tgusa said

"Boy do I long for the good old days when all I had to worry about was 1000 or so Soviet warheads targeted in my general direction."

I second that. At least they were predictible. imadinnerjacket is crazier than a shiitehouse rat, what with his glowing, blue auras and the 12 imman crawling out of a hole in the ground. This whole thing sounds like an H.P. Lovecraft story.

This whole thing sounds like an H.P. Lovecraft story.

I agree. But who could make this stuff up!?

Time for a reality check:

Aheminjhad says: "we are not seeking to build weapons of mass destruction."

What do we find? weapons grade plutonium which is not supposed to be there in Iran.

Facit: He is a liar. A stinking liar.

Fact: The Shihab 4 rockets - range, circa 2,500 KM,are already in production. This is why Aheminidjahd has been stalling for time. He wants the Shihab 4s up and running while the Shihab 5s go through the prototype phase.

FACT: When the Shihab 5s go into production - they will have a range of circa 4,500 KM, which changes the entire ballgame in this part of the world. This means that Berlin, London, Paris, Rome, Prague, Warsaw, Belgrade, Athens, Madrid are all potential targets. Time for Europe to wake up and see the threat right at it's front (or back, if you will) Door.

FACT: He openly declares that Israel should be wiped off the map. People of good conscience are appalled. Most muslims clap for him.

FACIT: Muslims who cheer him on are therefore not of good conscience. Therefore I see no reason to be nice to them. I do, however, have about 3,000 good reasons to make sure that they (jihadists) never get a chance to hit us again.

END FACIT: Just as with Adolph Hitler, if we go to sleep and ignore him or try to appease him, if we waste time trying to "understand" him, he will do exactly what he says he is going to do. Hitler's MEIN KAMPF was the most unread and most ignored bestseller of the 1930s. Good Lord, if only more people had actually read the stuff and paid attention to the signs of the times.... Aheminidjhad is making it much easier for us in the Internet age - he is spouting his personal MEIN KAMPF out of his mouth 24/7. All we have to do is hear and pay attention to the signs of the times.

I don't know about you, but I am tired of such tyrannical maniacs. Enough is enough.

If push comes to shove, then I say: Nuke 'em.

(And btw, I am not a neocon, I am a moderate and I voted for Kerry...so don't anyone come at me with that "liberals are traitors" junk. Most of us moderates are starting to get the same suspicions that you have here on this website)

More like a hideous Stephen King novel come to life.

bonncaruso says ...so don't anyone come at me with that "liberals are traitors" junk.

On this website we're all fellow Infidels with targets painted on our backs.

Yes, U-238 does not sustain fission. However, surround a neutron source with U-238 with heavy water (water containing the deuterium isotope of hydrogen) to slow down the neutrons, you get uranium-239 by slow-neutron capture. U-239 is not stable. Two neutrons decay, producing two protons and two beta particles. Now you have Pu-239.

Bomb fuel. Same stuff used to incinerate Nagasaki. Made the same way since the 1940's.

Most of us moderates are starting to get the same suspicions that you have here on this website

Posted by: bonncaruso at May 12, 2006 03:09 PM

Glad you are starting to tune in to what is happening. The problem is way too many on the left still think the war against Islam is something dreamed up by the Neocons. The sad fact is they have been at war with us for 1400 years.

Even the Bush presidency still seems to think that Islam is a religion of peace. We need leaders that recognize the threat and respond accordingly.

Robert Spencer for President, Hugh Fitzgerald for secretary of state and Michael Savage for secretary of defence. :-)

Alarmed_Pig_Farmer for Sec. of Agriculture

Naseem for court jester.

scary though, you can see how the countries line up for this big one.

Posted by: Lulu yes it is,but i always think of the people in the twin towers on 9-11.they never knew jets were about to take their lives.we must warn the ones who dont see the danger comming,or live with the fact we saw the wolf and said nothing.

bonncaruso wrote..
Most of us moderates are starting to get the same suspicions that you have here on this website.

i consider myself a moderate all until anyone threatens our way of life. Then, all bets are off. there are 2 types of moderate right now, those who fully understand the truth as it exists today and those who have yet to fully understand.
Welcome to the former!

That glow around Ahmadinejad is radiation, not a holy aura. He was probably playing with his new toy. With luck he will die quick from the exposure.

Short board surfer:

LOL!

Yes, U-238 does not sustain fission. However, surround a neutron source with U-238 with heavy water (water containing the deuterium isotope of hydrogen) to slow down the neutrons, you get uranium-239 by slow-neutron capture. U-239 is not stable. Two neutrons decay, producing two protons and two beta particles. Now you have Pu-239.

Bomb fuel. Same stuff used to incinerate Nagasaki. Made the same way since the 1940's.

Posted by: Eisenhund at May 12, 2006 03:18 PM

This is absolutely correct. That is why we should be concerned even if Iran did not have "enriched Uranium" -- as I believe you have pointed out already.

It is with profound obtuseness that so-called experts can find "enriched uranium" and are unable to connect the dots as to how the situation came to be and what it ultimately implies.

Or is it rather -- wanton and willfull ignornace. How is it that people can deny the existence of the biggest [expletive delete] white elephant residing in their own living rooms?

Especially, when that pachyderm is standing on their broken, and crumpled little toes!

left,right black or right.....if only americans would think like americans.stuff the labels and face the danger,we might win.but left is half,as is right.we need a whole.

I wish we could get our hands on some of this stuff. If there was a way to measure isotope ratios or some other way to get a "signature" of where this stuff came from... I have a feeling that the signature would show that it came from Pakistan or N. Korea.

ShortboardSurfer said

I just read on Drudge that Pres Bush may use the National Guard on the borders.

And this from the Administration that informs the Mexican government where the Minutemen are located so the illegal aliens can avoid them.

Aye yi yi.

BTW, I answered my own question about Hugh's absence; I was just on the wrong thread, he's present and accounted for.

"Naseem for court jester" ....LOL

Naseem suffers from MPD (multiple personality disorder), so "court jester" is but one of the many hats she wears beneath that burqa!

I have a question......after the heavy water is used and the nuclear stuff goes bad and it's time to get rid of the "old" stuff......where do you put it???

I guess nuclear waste is what I'm talking about. Is there nuclear waste from enriching all this?

If there is, are they smart enough to contain it there or will they just dump it in the ocean?

And I'm still not so sure if they realize what the aftermath of a nuclear bomb would be.

I just don't think these people are smart enough to have a weapon like this. Besides the fact their religion is not stable, THEY aren't stable.

I just don't think they've given thought of what a nuclear winter or the fallout would do to the entire area. What good would it do them if they have a leak like Chernobyl and can't even live there for say 25,000 years.

These people go nuts over a stupid cartoon. Imagine what would happen if their neighbor just spoke a wrong word.

Some people are too stupid to live.

" Over here..over here..bring the basket..I have found more.."

I just don't think these people are smart enough to have a weapon like this. Besides the fact their religion is not stable, THEY aren't stable.

Oh they're smart enough alright.

They have the best American Phd's and post-doctorates in Nuclear Physics & Chemistry from the top American Universities that Amercian taxpayers can buy.

The only idiots I'm sorry to say, are the one's who so gleefully paid for their education at the same time they so eagerly denied the same opportunites to their own kids.

Yeah, saddle em with student loans they'll never be able to pay off; let em work their way through college by washing dishes and mowing lawns. The foreign guests will just have to get grants!

LOL!

As Blondie said to Tuco in "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly:" -- "God's not on our side Tuco; He hates idiots."

Is there nuclear waste from enriching all this?

If there is, are they smart enough to contain it there or will they just dump it in the ocean?

Plenty of waste; I don't think its the ocean is where they plan on dumping it. Perhaps, someone elses city.

the leaders of iran are waiting for the 12th imam and the islamic jesus.then the islamic republic of iran can rule the world.and people wonder if they have thought this out.is it just me or is that a silly question?

storagemanager -

No, this is not a silly question, this is a very serious question; and I share your concern.

I've heard of the 12th Imam, but who is the Islamic Jesus?

Some people here seem to have advanced physics knowledge.
Can anyone answer this ?
I've seen on the news that some of Iran's nuclear preparation looks very ameteurish. It looks like theyre making home brew in a garage.
What are the chances of them blowing themselves up by prematurely putting the wrong things together as they often do with conventional bombs in Palestine? ( and therefore saving us the trouble )
Of course the West would get blamed.
Which leads me to a 2nd thought. as we will get blamed anyhow can we send in one of our guys with a fake beard and a briefcase with a timer which he leaves in a locker at Teheran Central or buried in a sand dune near Iminadinnerjacket's crib or one of their garage labs. Then catches the 1st flight out before the timer hit 12 .

re prev. post
You can tell I've read a lot of Spy vs Spy comics in MAD magazine,
So I know my stuff.

I have not read any news so frightening in years.
Posted by: chsw at May 12, 2006 02:45 PM
+++++++++++++++++=

How about the dems winning the presidency, the senate and the house??????????????

This might be a stretch regarding this thread, but interesting article regarding Iran, Pakistan and using nukes on Israel:

inbrief.threatswatch.org/2006/05/iran-asked-pak-army-for-nuclea/

Interesting what is lost in all this, the U.N. has this info (and how much more?) and it was given out in a hidden manner.

And the U.N. knows, but STILL can't see fit to sanction Iran, or even draft a letter, anything?

We should stay at th U.N. only to secure it's inaction on all issues that serve our enemys.

No hi, no hello, no nothing...

When I saw naked cartoons of a God's Messenger (P.B.U.H.) in one of the links posted on this site, I decided I will never come back to this website. But, still I came here to point out two things.
Firstly, I would like aware "Kate US" that I had made a complete reply (about 210 KB) to his "comment" in the article "D.C. Watson: All it took was a cartoon," but, I could not make a comment at that article. Either I have been deprived of posting more in that article or the comments have reached their maximum limit. Anywayz, I don't want to re-discuss all those issues here.
Secondly, I just came for posting the truth of the Iranian problem... It's an article by David Morrison, a citizen who does not blindly follow his government... That's all! Don't expect me to be coming back for reading or posting comments.

Q: Is Iran breaking the NPT?
A: No, but the US/EU are
by David Morrison
1 May 2006, Labour & Trade Union Review

Available at: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/downloads/irannot.pdf

FULL TEXT IS GIVEN BELOW:-

Q: Is Iran breaking the NPT?
A: No, but the US/EU are
by David Morrison

“Under NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] rules, there is nothing illegal about any state having enrichment or reprocessing technology – processes that are basic to the production and recycling of nuclear reactor fuel – even though these operations can also produce the high enriched uranium or plutonium that can be used in a nuclear weapon. An increasing number of countries have sought to master these parts of the ‘nuclear fuel cycle…”

These are words of the Director-General of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, in an interview with the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram (6-12 April 2006) [1]

Specifically, on Iran’s enrichment programme, he told Reuters on 30 March 2006: [2]

“Nobody has the right to punish Iran for enrichment. We have not seen nuclear material diverted to a nuclear weapon…”

It could hardly be clearer. By engaging in uranium enrichment-related activities to produce nuclear fuel, as Brazil and Japan are also doing, Iran is acting within the NPT. And the IAEA has found no evidence that Iran is diverting nuclear material for weapons purposes. In short, Iran is not breaking any of its NPT commitments.

None of this will come as a surprise to regular readers of the Labour & Trade Union Review, but it is rare for ElBaradei to state these crucial facts with such clarity, facts which demolish the US/EU case for reporting Iran to the Security Council and pressurising it to abandon its enrichment programme.

(But don’t expect ElBaradei to repeat these crucial facts every day of the week – to do so would bring down the wrath of the US and others upon his head – so, having put these crucial facts on the record once, you can be sure that from now on all you will hear from him are his doubts about Iran’s past nuclear activities and its alleged failure to answer questions about them. And when it is stated as a fact by the US and others that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, don’t expect ElBaradei to pop up and make it clear that the IAEA is not in possession of evidence to prove this.

It reminds me of the run up to the invasion of Iraq, when Hans Blix, the head of UNMOVIC, made regular reports to the Security Council. Then, it could be guaranteed that buried away in each of them there would be a sentence saying that UNMOVIC didn’t have any evidence that Iraq possessed chemical or biological weapons – for example, the report he delivered on 27 January 2003 stated “these reports do not contend that weapons of mass destruction remain in Iraq” – but on each occasion this crucial fact was masked by a host of queries about “unaccounted for” material. And, when time and time again the US/UK asserted baldly that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons, Blix never made it clear that UNMOVIC didn’t possess evidence to prove this. Had he done so, it would have made it much more difficult for the US/UK to invade Iraq on the pretext that Iraq possessed such weapons. However, he said enough to be able to claim after the event, when no weapons were discovered in Iraq, that he and UNMOVIC had got it right.)

ElBaradei could have gone further and pointed out that possessing enrichment and reprocessing technology for peaceful purposes is not merely legal under NPT rules, it is supposed to be an “inalienable right” guaranteed under the NPT to all signatories to the Treaty, Article IV(1) of which states:[3]

“Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.”

In other words, those states that are seeking to prevent Iran from engaging in uranium enrichment to fuel nuclear power stations are acting contrary to the NPT. Iran is not.

Reported to the Security Council

The issue of Iran’s nuclear activities is now on the agenda of the UN Security Council. It got there as a result of a resolution passed by the IAEA Board on 4 February 2006 [4]. This requested ElBaradei to inform the Security Council that certain steps, defined in paragraph 1 of the resolution, were “required of Iran” (and to send the Security Council all future IAEA reports and resolutions about Iran).

My article, Iran “reported” to the Security Council[5], examines these steps, chief among which is the resuspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. None of these steps are “required of Iran” under the NPT. The resolution itself makes this clear in paragraph 5, where the steps are referred to as “confidence-building measures, which are voluntary, and non legally binding.”

In other words, Iran was reported to the Security Council, not because it refused to take measures required by the NPT, but because it refused to take measures that were explicitly stated to be voluntary and not required by the NPT. It gives a whole new meaning to the word voluntary.

Negotiations with the EU

It is important to recall that Iran first agreed to the suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities in November 2004, when it signed the Paris Agreement [6] with the EU (represented by UK, France and Germany). This suspension was a voluntary act of goodwill on the part of Iran while negotiations with the EU were taking place. As the Paris Agreement itself states:

“The E3/EU recognize that this suspension is a voluntary confidence building measure and not a legal obligation …. In the context of this suspension, the E3/EU and Iran have agreed to begin negotiations, with a view to reaching a mutually acceptable agreement on long term arrangements.”

The negotiations came to an abrupt halt in August 2005 when the EU proposed [7] to Iran that it abandon not just uranium enrichment, but all aspects of its so-called “nuclear fuel cycle”. Instead of mining its own uranium ore, and processing and enriching it to make fuel for its nuclear reactors, as Iran planned to do, the EU proposals required Iran to import enriched uranium fuel, and to export spent fuel afterwards.

This would have meant that nuclear power generation in Iran would be completely dependent on fuel from abroad, which could be cut off at any time, even though Iran has a domestic supply of uranium ore. It was no surprise, therefore, that Iran rejected these proposals out of hand.

Following the failure to reach “a mutually acceptable agreement on long term arrangements” with the EU, Iran proceeded to resume enrichment and reprocessing activities – as it was entitled to do since the suspension was voluntary in the first place. The resumption began at the uranium processing plant in Isfahan in August 2005. Later, in January 2006, enrichment was resumed at the pilot plant at Natanz.

The latter was the trigger for the EU to call a special meeting of the IAEA Board which passed the resolution of 4 February 2006 reporting Iran to the Security Council. Iran’s only crime was to voluntarily resume what it had voluntarily suspended in November 2004.

March Report

The formal reporting of Iran to the Security Council occurred after the March meeting of the IAEA Board, at which ElBaradei made yet another report to the Board on Iran’s nuclear activities [8]. On 8 March 2006, he duly sent this report to the Security Council.

Like all of his previous reports, this one did not present any evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. It formally reported that Iran had not obeyed the IAEA Board’s request to suspend enrichment and related activities. On IAEA access to Iran’s nuclear sites, the report said:

“Iran has continued to facilitate access under its Safeguards Agreement as requested by the Agency and, until 6 February 2006, implemented the Additional Protocol as if it were in force, including by providing, in a timely manner, the requisite declarations and access to locations.” (Paragraph 30)

In other words, in response to its referral to the Security Council by the IAEA Board resolution of 4 February 2006, Iran reduced IAEA access to its nuclear sites. Since 6 February 2006, it is no longer granting unannounced access to sites in accordance with the so-called Additional Protocol to its Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA (which Iran signed in December 2006 but the Majlis hasn’t ratified). So, the net effect to date of referring Iran to the Security Council has been to reduce the IAEA’s ability to monitor Iran’s nuclear activities.

Signing a Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA, and implementing its provisions, is a requirement of the NPT (see Article III(1)). Signing and implementing an Additional Protocol is not a requirement of the NPT. It is a voluntary matter for each signatory state, so by ceasing to implement its provisions Iran is not breaking any commitment under the NPT – it is continuing to allow the IAEA the degree of access that is mandatory under the NPT.

Presidential statement

The US/UK predicted immediate “action” by the Security Council in response to this report by ElBaradei. However, it took them three weeks to persuade Russia and China to agree a form of words for a statement by the President of the Council, which was eventually issued on 29 March 2006 [9] in the name of César Mayoral of Argentina, the President of the Council in March.

(A presidential statement is the lowest form of Security Council “action” – even lower than a Chapter VI resolution, which can be safely ignored since it doesn’t carry any form of sanction, either economic or military. Only Chapter VII resolutions may be accompanied by the latter.)

The presidential statement calls upon Iran to take the steps “required” of it by the IAEA Board in its resolution of 4 February 2006. However, it doesn’t describe these steps as “voluntary and non legally binding” as the Board resolution does. But, it begins by reaffirming that engaging in nuclear activities for peaceful purposes is a right guaranteed under the NPT, saying:

“The Security Council reaffirms its commitment to the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and recalls the right of States Party, in conformity with articles I and II of that Treaty, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.”

In other words, having reaffirmed its commitment to the NPT, the Security Council is asking Iran to desist from activities that are supposed to be its “inalienable right” under the NPT.

Another IAEA report

The Presidential statement requested that ElBaradei make a report to the IAEA and the Security Council within 30 days, and he did so as ordered on 28 April 2006 (see, for example, BBC summary[10])

The report told essentially the same story as before: again no evidence was presented that Iran was developing nuclear weapons. Even John Bolton, the US Ambassador to the UN, reluctantly admitted this on 28 April 2006, saying:[11]

“I think, if anything, the IAEA report shows that Iran has accelerated its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, although, of course, the report doesn’t make any conclusions in the regard.”

The “acceleration” referred to by Bolton related to Iran’s announcement on 13 April 2006 that it had succeeded in enriching a small amount of uranium to the level required for nuclear fuel. ElBaradei reported that the IAEA had examined samples of what had been produced and concluded that the enrichment level declared by Iran (3.6%) was probably correct.

What next?

The US/EU now intend to press for a resolution under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, demanding that Iran take the steps “required” of it by the IAEA Board in its February resolution, in particular, the suspension of enrichment-related activities. Initially, they do not intend to press for a Chapter VII resolution accompanied by economic sanctions.

The UK strategy for action against Iran in the Security Council was set out in a letter, which was leaked to The Times and published on 22 March 2006. The letter, dated 16 March 2006, was written by John Sawers, the political director of the Foreign Office, to his counterparts in France, Germany and the US. Its main theme was that it was going to be difficult to persuade Russia and China to take any effective action on the Security Council. Sawers wrote:[12]

“Implicit in the paper is a recognition that we are not going to bring the Russians and Chinese to accept significant sanctions over the coming months, certainly not without further efforts to bring the Iranians around.”

“Kislyak [Sawers’ Russian counterpart] might argue that those diplomatic efforts should start straightaway after a Presidential Statement is adopted. Our own assessment here is that the Iranians will not feel under much pressure from PRST [Presidential statement] on its own, and they will need to know that more serious measures are likely. This means putting the Iran dossier onto a Chapter VII basis. We may also need to remove one of the Iranian arguments that the suspension called for is ‘voluntary’. We could do both by making the voluntary suspension a mandatory requirement to the Security Council, in a Resolution we would aim to adopt I, say, early May.”

Note that an important reason advanced for a Chapter VII resolution is to transform a request to Iran from the IAEA Board to voluntarily suspend its enrichment-related activities – a request Iran could legitimately refuse – into a mandatory demand from the Security Council, perhaps eventually backed up by economic sanctions, if Iran refuses to comply.

For the US, John Bolton expressed it this way on 28 April 2006:[11]

“The purpose of acting under Chapter 7 is to invoke the mandatory compliance features of Chapter 7, which … would be binding on all UN members. Therefore, it’s not a matter of discretion for Iran. They have to comply or the Security Council is free to take other steps.”

Obviously, the US/EU are conscious of the shaky ground on which they currently stand in asking Iran to suspend enrichment. They know full well that Iran is within its rights in refusing to take any of the steps “required” of it by the IAEA Board resolution of 4 February 2006. As the resolution itself says, these steps amount to “confidence-building measures, which are voluntary, and non legally binding” and not required of Iran by the NPT. Understandably, therefore, the US/EU are anxious to move onto more solid ground where the Security Council orders Iran to take these steps in a Chapter VII resolution.

Iran a threat to peace?
Article 39 is the first article in Chapter VII of the UN Charter. It says:[13]

“The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

Article 41 provides for economic sanctions and Article 42 for military sanctions.

Before a Chapter VII resolution is passed in respect of Iran – even recommendations under Article 40 without sanctions, which is envisaged by the US/EU initially – the Security Council has to formally declare that Iran is a “threat to the peace” or that a “breach of the peace, or act of aggression” has taken place. Even the most fertile minds in Washington and London would have difficulty making a case that Iran has been guilty of either of the latter, so the US/EU will most likely try to persuade Russia and China to indict Iran as a “threat to the peace.”

At a press conference on 28 April 2006, John Bolton was asked what case could be made that Iran was a threat to peace. He replied:[11]

“I think that the evidence of Iran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, its extensive program to achieve a ballistic missile capability of longer and longer range and greater accuracy, constitutes a classic threat to international peace and security, especially when combined with Iran’s long status as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.”

He should think before opening his mouth – if the possession of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles is a measure of a state’s “threat to peace”, then John Bolton has the privilege of representing the biggest “threat to peace” in the world – by a distance. And Iran is way, way behind.

Remember that Iran, unlike Israel, possesses no nuclear weapons, and there is no objective evidence that it is developing them. Remember that Iran, unlike Israel, has not invaded any of its neighbours in living memory and, when it was invaded by Iraq in 1980, the Security Council didn’t lift a finger to help, because the US/UK were cheering on Iraq at the time.

Yet the US/EU is about to press the Security Council to deem Iran a “threat to the peace”, something which it has never done to Israel – a Chapter VII resolution of any kind has never been passed against Israel, despite its possession of nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them, and its invasion of every one of its neighbours at one time or another, and its annexation of bits of them.

The supreme irony of this is that the US/UK, which invaded Iraq in 2003 causing the deaths of tens of thousands of people, are taking the lead in the indictment of Iran as a “threat to peace”. They were, of course, able to invade and occupy Iraq without being deemed a “threat to peace” by the Security Council because they wield a veto on the Security Council. By the same token, Israel has never been deemed a “threat to peace” by the Security Council, because it has a veto-wielding friend in Washington.

The corollary of this is that, if the five veto-wielding members of the Security Council decide to gang up on an ordinary UN member, with no veto and no special friend with a veto, it can be declared to be a “threat to the peace” without the slightest justification. It remains to be seen if Russia and China allow this to happen to Iran.

Amending the NPT

If Iran is forbidden to enrich uranium by a mandatory Security Council resolution, that is tantamount to amending the NPT, without Iran’s consent, to take away Iran’s right to engage in nuclear activities for peaceful purposes. Article IV(1) of the NPT would in effect become:

“Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty EXCEPT IRAN to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.”

At that point, Iran would be justified in withdrawing from the NPT, since rights that were supposedly guaranteed under the NPT when it signed up to in 1968 would have been taken away.

It remains to be seen if Russia and China go along with this denial of NPT rights to Iran. At the moment, they say that they are opposed to a Chapter VII resolution, even one without economic sanctions. But, both of them are opposed to Iran having enrichment facilities on its own soil, so they may support a Chapter VII resolution eventually. According to Sawers’ letter, the UK believes that they can be persuaded to agree to one without accompanying economic sanctions in the next few weeks.

New offer to Iran

Sawers then envisages a new offer being made to Iran to supply fuel from abroad for its proposed nuclear power stations. Making such an offer to Iran is deemed to be a necessary condition for persuading Russia and China to go further and agree to another Chapter VII resolution, this time one with economic sanctions of some kind. Sawers writes:

“In return for the Russians and Chinese agreeing to this [initial Chapter VII resolution], we would then want to put together a package that could be presented to the Iranians as a new proposal. Ideally this would have the explicit backing of Russia, China and the United States as well as the E3, though Nick [Burns of the US] will want to consider the scope of presenting this in that way. Our thought is that we would need to finalise this during June, and the obvious occasion to do so would be in the margins of the G8 Foreign Ministers’ meeting. The period running up to the G8 Summit will be when our influence on Russia will be at its maximum, and we need to plan accordingly.”

“In parallel with agreeing a new proposal, we will also want to bind Russia and China into agreeing to further measures that will be taken by the Security Council should the Iranians fail to engage positively. … We would not, at this stage, want to be explicit about what would be involved then – there will need to be extensive negotiations on that in May/June.”

An offer from Russia for the supply of fuel to Iran has been on the table since last autumn. This is that Russia take uranium hexafluoride produced by Iran from domestic ore at Isfahan and enrich it in Russia, and produce fuel rods for return to Iran. This would mean Iran abandoning uranium enrichment at Natanz. Any new proposal is bound to be on similar lines, the key element being that Iran has no enrichment facilities on its own soil.

The Russian proposal has the support of the EU, and China – and of the US, which until November 2005 had not associated itself with any proposal of this kind to Iran. While Iran has not publicly accepted this proposal, even as a basis for negotiations, it has not rejected it out of hand either and fitful discussions seem to be continuing with Russia about it.

Note that, according to Sawers, the US is hanging back from being associated with any new proposal to Iran, along with the EU and Russia and China. This is a continuation of the US refusal to deal directly with Iran since 1979 (apart from the arms for hostages affair in the 1980s.)

This principle has recently been breached with Bush’s authorisation of Zalmay Khalilzad, the US ambassador in Iraq, to talk directly to Iran about Iraqi matters. This authorisation was granted last November 2005, but no meetings have taken place as yet, even though Khalilzad has repeatedly asked Iran for a meeting – in early March an Iranian official showed John Snow of Channel 4 News evidence of Khalilzad’s requests. However, it now appears that no meetings will take place until after a new Iraqi government is established and in a position to take part.

It will be interesting to see if the US agrees to deal directly with Iran on nuclear issues as well.

References
[1] weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/789/in4.htm
[2] go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=11701885
[3] www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf
[4] www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2006/gov2006-14.pdf
[5] www.david-morrison.org.uk/iran/iran-reported.htm
[6] www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/2004/infcirc637.pdf
[7] www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/2005/infcirc651.pdf
[8] www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2006/gov2006-15.pdf
[9] www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8679.doc.htm
[10] news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4956882.stm
[11] www.state.gov/p/io/rls/rm/65458.htm
[12] www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2098203,00.html
[13] www.un.org/aboutun/charter/

SUMMARY
-------
(1) Enriching Uranium is Iran's inalienable right, granted to it by Article IV (1) of the NPT.
(2) Iran will not be capable of making a nuclear weapon in the near future, Russian Chief of General Staff Yuri Baluyevsky said on Saturday. "I can confidently say that what Iran is doing today does not allow it the possibility, either in the near or distant future, to make a nuclear weapon," he was quoted by Interfax as saying.
Source: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-04/15/content_4427907.htm
Furthermore, there is NO documented evidence available with any one that Iran is making a nuclear weapon. Rather, Mohammed ElBaradei pointed out that Iran's claim of enriching Uranium upto 3.6% was correct. John Bolton, the US Ambassador to the UN, reluctantly admitted this on 28 April 2006.
(3) Mohammed ElBaradei said only once: "No one has the right to punish Iran." He does not repeat this statement, every time Sharon or Bush threatens Iran, nor does he give an explanation of the word "required" as used by US Officials, that this requirement is voluntary, not legally binding and Iran can safely shatter the US dreams and also, he does not want to lose his job, coz saying such things may earn him the "Wrath" of US & Israel.
(4) US & Israel are depriving Iran of its inalienable right, by force & by threatening to attack it with B-61 Nuclear bombs and Bunker buster JDAMs, GBUs, etc. Thus these two countries should be declared, a threat to public peace by the UN, in accordance with Article 39 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. After doing this, they should pass Chapter VII resolution for military and economic sanctions against Iran, but, nothing is happening.
(5) US & Europe are striving zealously to ammend Article IV (1) of the NPT, to include the words "EXCEPT IRAN." Such is the discriminatory attitude with the Muslim countries and yet the US/EU are "surprised" that Iran will consider to break the NPT, if such an ammendment is undertaken.
(6) John Bolton said: 'I think that the evidence of Iran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, its extensive program to achieve a ballistic missile capability of longer and longer range and greater accuracy, constitutes a classic threat to international peace...' If this is the criteria for identifying a 'threat to public peace' then, as David Morrison says, "'...then John Bolton has the privilege of representing the biggest “threat to peace” in the world."
(7) Iran is neither making any nukes nor has any nukes, unlike Israel, yet no sanctions is put on Israel, despite Israel being a 'threat to public peace.' Furthermore, Brazil and Japan are also doing exactly the same as Iran i.e. mastering parts of the Nuclear Fuel cycle, yet no trouble is given to them.
(8) Might is Right and the Media is the propanganda machine, proving that might is "indeed" right. "The corollary of this," says David Morrison, "is that, if the five veto-wielding members of the Security Council decide to gang up on an ordinary UN member, with no veto and no special friend with a veto, it can be declared to be a “threat to the peace” without the slightest justification."
(9) The packages being provided to Iran are come to the conclusion that there should be no enrichment on the Iranian soil, so that whenever desired, the supply of nuclear fuel can be cut out.
(10) David Morrsion wrote: "Signing and implementing an Additional Protocol is not a requirement of the NPT. It is a voluntary matter for each signatory state, so by ceasing to implement its provisions Iran is not breaking any commitment under the NPT – it is continuing to allow the IAEA the degree of access that is mandatory under the NPT."
(11) The US/UK predicted immediate “action” by the Security Council in response to this report by ElBaradei. However, it took them three weeks to persuade Russia and China to agree a form of words for a statement by the President of the Council. A presidential statement is the lowest form of Security Council “action” – even lower than a Chapter VI resolution, which can be safely ignored since it doesn’t carry any form of sanction, either economic or military.
(12) The Security Council is asking Iran to desist from activities that are supposed to be its “inalienable right” under the NPT.

LET US ALL WAIT FOR THE NEW 9/11 or 7/7 on G8 SUMMIT
Yeah! I am damn serious! There will be a new 9/11 or 7/7 on this year's G-8 Summit, manufactured by expert Intelligence agencies like CIA, MI-5, MI-6 and other companies participating in "anti"-terror drills. We will be "waiting" for this "terrorist" attack and of course, as usual, there will be "anti"-terror drills, at the same time and at the same place (of course, with the same 'terrorists'.)

David Morrison wrote:
The UK strategy for action against Iran in the Security Council was set out in a letter, which was leaked to The Times and published on 22 March 2006. The letter, dated 16 March 2006, was written by John Sawers, the political director of the Foreign Office, to his counterparts in France, Germany and the US. Its main theme was that it was going to be difficult to persuade Russia and China to take any effective action on the Security Council. Sawers wrote:[1]

“We may also need to remove one of the Iranian arguments that the suspension called for is ‘voluntary’. We could do both by making the voluntary suspension a mandatory requirement to the Security Council, in a Resolution we would aim to adopt I, say, early May.”
“In return for the Russians and Chinese agreeing to this [initial Chapter VII resolution], we would then want to put together a package that could be presented to the Iranians as a new proposal. Ideally this would have the explicit backing of Russia, China and the United States as well as the E3, though Nick [Burns of the US] will want to consider the scope of presenting this in that way. Our thought is that we would need to finalise this during June, and the obvious occasion to do so would be in the margins of the G8 Foreign Ministers’ meeting. The period running up to the G8 Summit will be when our influence on Russia will be at its maximum, and we need to plan accordingly.”

NOTES

[1] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2098203,00.html

Yeah! "to plan accordingly" for the G8 Summit is to have a new 9/11 or 7/7 on G8 Summit, I can say this seriously!
Look at what Webster G. Tarpley has to say on this issue:-
"IF A TERRORIST ATTACK OCCURS, BLAME CHENEY

Since last July, the world has known of the order from Dick Cheney to the Pentagon to prepare for the atomic bombing of Iran in the wake of a new 9/11 terrorist atrocity. Given Cheney’s manifest aggressive intent, it should also be plain that he is not occupying his time doing rain dances in the hopes of conjuring up a new terrorist attack. Cheney and his invisible government backers in the US-UK rogue network are actively preparing a new 9/11 or Gulf of Tonkin provocation with weapons of mass destruction in order to secure the pretext for their attack. Our advice to the world is accordingly: if mysterious WMD incidents occur anywhere in the world, don’t start looking for the swarthy perpetrators sporting turbans in the caves of Pushtunistan. Look instead in Dick Cheney’s office."

Source: http://www.waronfreedom.org/wgt/cartoon.html
Muhammad (P.B.U.H.) Cartoons, RECRUITING EUROPE FOR BUSH’S ATTACK ON IRAN
By Webster Griffin Tarpley

O God! Save us from this new 9/11 or 7/7 which is going to happen on G8 SUMMIT! O God! Save Iran from the US & Israel's "War On Freedom" and "War for Spreading Terror." (AMEN!)

That's all what I came to say... Good bye.

iran thinks when the hidden imam returns jesus will be with him.but this jesus is muslim.which i reject because jesus was a jew.

Wow, the muslims are busy tonight. The jews are behind it all I got that. You are the good guys, I got that too. I'm still coming after you. BTW, I will have help. Your days of terror are over. My turn.

Special quest, so true "I wonder why Iran has not, yet. Did their provocative statements get ahead of their production capabilities? Or do they have something else in mind for a test detonation?"

As I have followed the rise of nuclear Iran I have often wondered just that. I have been wishing see this test detonation, as strange as it might seem, because I too fear that a test might be made on an infidel target , an American port or a European target. At least if they do a conventional test it will be out in the open and perhaps it can be dealt with.

This is one old man who fears for the lives of his grandchildren and prays everyday for our leaders to wake up before it is too late.

If the world plunges into a nuclear war, then truly the dark dreams of the Iranian tyrant will come true. The world of our grandchildren will be forever changed, we can only hope that they are stronge and fortunate enough to overcome this new dark age. If they understand and cherish their history, culture and religion they will survive.

As I follow the rise of nuclear Iran, I steal myself for the darkness ahead.

Perhaps I'm just a tired and ailing old man, but praying would be the right thing just now. Let us now continue the struggle for our children's sack.

For the future of our civilization, Stop Iran from getting the bomb!

El Cid...it's possible that Iran already has 'the bomb', and is the reason for so much bravado.

Mutual assured destruction wont work with Beasty Boy the sock puppet. As it is, he is begging to get smacked, wants to start some sht. It's quite possible that the Sons of Allah have already placed WMD's of some types in and around the US, possibly other countrys. All to go off on some signal from Mahdi or someone. I think that will quickly convince all skeptics. Iran and anyone who gets in the way, will get fried. Iran will do damage to the US and Israel, but will not prevail...Allah will not help them, and he knows best...

(7) Iran is neither making any nukes nor has any nukes, unlike Israel, yet no sanctions is put on Israel, despite Israel being a 'threat to public peace.' Furthermore, Brazil and Japan are also doing exactly the same as Iran i.e. mastering parts of the Nuclear Fuel cycle, yet no trouble is given to them.

Posted by: Abdul Rehman [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 12, 2006 11:04 PM

Abdul, Abdul, Abdul.

Thats quite a rant you had going there but let me just clarify the issue for you.

(1) Iran managed to hide its nuclear program for close to 20 years.

(2) Israel, Brazil and Japan havent recently threatend to wipe any countries off the map.

(3) Muslims are ordered by their holy scripture to kill the infidels and jews.

Muslims just cant be trusted!

Yes that is right km. muslims can't be trusted ANYWHERE in the world.

"we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."
Winston Churchill

Let us think where we shall fight the muslims. We shall not fight them on the beaches. The muslim navigator will spend half is time calculting the direction of bloody mecca,and our navies will get the muslim ships meanwhile. Landing grounds,no. Whatever remains of the pathetic air forces will be destroyed at the muslim runways.Yes we shall fight in the fields and the hills. And on the streets.Urban warfare is the way of muslims. We have to be VERY ruthless in urban warfare.

Urban warfare is the way of muslims. We have to be VERY ruthless in urban warfare.
Posted by: arjun.sevak

Yuck...you may be right, but it's still a big yuck. An army usually tries to avoid that if possible. But when the ruthless rule in invoked, it's time to go for the throat. BUT, due to PC influences, several American soldiers were charged with crimes, for doing just that, in battle. A soldier is supposed to be ruthless in battle...he may get himself killed if he is not.
BUUUTTT...dont get too ruthless. If you do too good a job protecting yourself, and taking out the enemy, you might get arrested. They used to give you medals for that, now it's jail time.
So the clever tie your hands , give you a gun with no bullets, and send you off to face the enemy, then arrest you if you manage to survive...thanks a lot...yuck...have a good day...

Abdul Rehman wants to blame Cheney for any nuclear bombs? Abdul you are a typical muslim, you cannot take responsibility for any of your own actions. why does iran need nuclear electricity, when they are sitting on an ocean of oil? mmm
iran is continuely wanting a fight, they are calling for destruction of the West, Israel and the US.
if you think iran can go and set off bombs without any repercussions, you will be sadly mistaken. you can kiss off mecca, medina and rest of your stone age culture goodbye!

arjun.sevak, we will prevail, we must prevail at whatever cost. The nature of the confrontation in all it's ferocity will be determined by our enemies, just as it was in the last great war.

The West turned away for total global catastrophe during the cold war, the other side had just enough of a drop humanity to turn away from the nuclear furnace.

I wonder if this new enemy, political Islam, shiite Iran has this self preservation. I doubt it and I doubt it more after my understanding of Islam grows.

These people are greater diehards then the last evil the world faced.

I believe that they want this fight, now or later, but will not stop and take with them a generation of young and old, and leave our world humbled.

If we resist we must be willing to sacrifice our blood and treasure.

If we do nothing then the worlds culture plunge into a thousand years of dark age.

These are the choices we face now, none of them good but one that will allow our survival.

Brace yourself, great will and strength will be required for what is ahead.

>>> Abdul Rehman wants to blame Cheney for any nuclear bombs? Abdul you are a typical muslim, you cannot take responsibility for any of your own actions.
It was WEBSTER GRIFFIN TARPLEY who blamed Cheney...

>>> Why does iran need nuclear electricity, when they are sitting on an ocean of oil? mmm

NPT Article IV(1) reads:
“Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.”

Source: www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc140.pdf

So, it is the inalienable right of every member of the UN & those who signed this NPT, that they are allowed "to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination..."
My exams will start on 25th May, 2006 so I can't give time explaining to you guys (and of course, I already know that you will never change your views regarding the Muslims...)

>>> if you think iran can go and set off bombs without any repercussions, you will be sadly mistaken. you can kiss off mecca, medina and rest of your stone age culture goodbye!

Ha ha ha... keep on going mister... The Bush regime along with Rogue networks carried out the drama of 9/11, killing 20,000 innocent Americans. Tens and thousands of americans are testifying this, mostly those who were eye-witnesses, fire-fighters or knew about other atrocities and the controlled media for promoting propaganda. You can buy the book "9/11 Synthetic Terror - Made in USA," written by Webster G. Tarpley and the thousand other materials available on the web...

>>> The West turned away for total global catastrophe during the cold war, the other side had just enough of a drop humanity to turn away from the nuclear furnace.

It is indeed amazing that the ones who fear a nuclear strike, are the only ones living under the sky, to have used it & whose hands are dirty with the blood of innocent citizens of Japan.

Neither have I enough time to satisfy you, nor do I want to waste my energies in those who think they are already "well-awared" of what is happening.

The only thing which is visible from your posts is the amount of Islamophobia diffused into your hearts and minds by the state-controlled Media.

Regarding Jihad, I already answered Robert Spencer's article "Qur'an and Jihadism" and also witnessed the results.

>>> "we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."
Winston Churchill

Your choice; I won't stop you if you prefer Winston Churchill to Jesus (P.B.U.H.) [who said: "If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn and offer him the other also"] lest you accuse me of pasting Islam on the sword.

>>>we will prevail, we must prevail at whatever cost.

Rest of the comments are 99% the same. So, you agree that you are depriving a UN member of its "unalienable" rights, whenever you desire.
All this reflects one thing: Might is Right.

>>>muslims can't be trusted ANYWHERE in the world.

My only mistake was that I was born to a Muslim family. This was the mistake which I made, but, didn't knew the method to avoid it. Soon we will be under the "Wrath" of the Bush regime; I live in Peshawar (NWFP, Pakistan) close to North Waziristan. Who knows when a US Jihadi pilot comes and throws one bomb onto our house and then, my body will shatter into a hundred thousand pieces and my bones converted into a powder of Calcium Phosphate and soon, some birds, insects & other animals would be feeding on me. And on all this, Jihad Watch will say: 'Some terrorists having WMDs were killed in an air-strike.'

The conclusion of all this is that A MUSLIM'S ONLY MISTAKE IS THAT HE IS A MUSLIM.

I don't why I came here again when I know in advance that I will be "gifted" with a dozen of abuses.

So you just completely ignore the reasons I outlined for you Abdul. Here they are again for you.

(1) Iran managed to hide its nuclear program for close to 20 years.

(2) Israel, Brazil and Japan havent recently threatend to wipe any countries off the map.

(3) Muslims are ordered by their holy scripture to kill the infidels and jews.

Muslims just cant be trusted!

Answer the 3 points raised above and maybe we will start to take you seriously. I will wager though that your Muslim mind will not be able to see past the US/Zioniist conspiracy theories you have been indoctrinated into.

Let me just clarify my own view of things as well, 911 was not the start of this war. This war has been on going for 1400 years. There are indeed many lines of evidence which suggest the US allowed 911 to happen. All I can say is I am glad that our leaders had the foresight to allow Muslims to attack New york and Washington. Had this not happened your demographic jihad would be continuing to this day without anyone in the west raising an eyebrow. What matters most from 911 is that the world recieved a much needed wakeup call to Islams intentions, 3000 people and a couple of buildings were worth the sacrifice.

We in the west are on to you and your barbaric religion. I personally dont blame you for being born into a muslim family. However it is obvious that you have access to information sources other than the koran so if you cant see the problems that your so called religion of peace is causing across the globe then I will not feel sorry when you are vaporised by munitions which my tax dollars have paid for.

storagemanager -

Yeah, the term "Islamic Jesus" is an oxymoron, for the very reason you stated: Jesus was a Jew!

Abdul Rehman -

In your above post you mentioned the words of Jesus, "If anyone strikes your right cheek, offer him your left".

I happen to agree with Jesus' mandate to "turn the other cheek", but what I DON'T agree with, is how you've chosen to use this particular passage. In my opinion, there are two huge errors that you are making with this scripture:

You are quoting from Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, and it's important to note that Jesus was speaking to "individuals" during that sermon, not to governmental organizations.

Which brings me to your second error -- the bible does give "Kings and Rulers" certain powers and rights to "make war" in order that they can protect the nation that they have been put in charge of; and since you seem to know the Bible so well, then I will let you research these scriptures yourself, as there are far too many to quote.

So you see, President Bush DOES have biblical grounds for making war with Iran, or anyone else who poses a threat to our safety and security. It's my president's JOB to ensure that American lives be protected!!!!!!!

And let me add one more important fact before closing -- One day, Jesus Christ will return to earth and "make war" on those who oppose Him; but I bet you knew that, because you seem to know the bible so well. Read the Book of Revelation, and you will learn that Jesus has a wrathful side as well. All in good time, all in good time.

If you choose to reply, then PLEASE keep it short and to the point. Thank you.

Sorry for this late reply... I could not find adequate time to post something here. I want to tell everyone that I am preparing an answer to the objections raised; I will post it as soon as I complete it.
I found it better to notify you guys here lest someone starts living in a fool's paradise that I have "run away" from the discussion.

Were waiting Abdul.

(Sorry for this extremely late reply... My exams are starting on 25th May, so, I don’t find enough time for this...
Sorry to Mr. Champ... Firstly, because, I have not answered him in this post; secondly, because, I did not act upon his advice and made this post too much long...)

IMPORTANT GUIDELINES
(1) Read the post fully & carefully
(2) Don’t SKIP through the text; read it in the order it has been arranged, otherwise, it may seem to be a complete “non-sense.”
(3) Read the provided links for details if skeptic
(4) Stay cool-minded!!!

I will first start off with those things which I missed before.

Spencer’s coverage of this issue is incredible, like he started this article with a title: “More Uranium Reportedly Found in Iran.” The title is interesting because the use of the word “More” signifies the fact that there was already something fishy going on in Iran!
Furthermore, the use of the word “reportedly” is appreciable; careful selection of words is important in developing Islamophobia. A US Citizen, Stephen M. St. John, wrote in his article (A Dissenting Critique of the 9/11 Commission Report) as follows:-

‘Let this new investigation [into 9/11] avoid altogether the word “reportedly” which the 9/11 Commissioners used no less than 63 times. Loose use of language is conducive to imprecise thinking, which leads to shaky conclusions.’
Source: http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4wbps/id5.html

I would also like to add that simply using the word “reportedly” obscures the one who actually has reported that fact (and thus hides the authenticity of the report) and does not give the reader a chance to become aware of the reporter, unless he takes the trouble to see the footnotes or whatever else has been provided, if any (which ordinary readers [i.e. lay-men] will not do in 80% of the cases.)

Now, coming to the body-text, there are a lot of problems here!
(1) U.N. Atomic Agency found traces of highly enriched Uranium in an Iranian site, but, yet Mohammed ElBaradei told Reuters on 30 March 2006:
“We have not seen nuclear material diverted to a nuclear weapon...”
Source: http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=11701885
Mohammed ElBaradei made another report and presented it to the IAEA and the Security Council on 28 April, 2006. In this report, ElBaradei showed that IAEA had examined samples of what had been produced and concluded that the enrichment level declared by Iran (3.6%) was probably correct.
(2) The “diplomats” in Austria came to know this and gave away the information, even before the samples were sent to the lab for analysis, which is indeed interesting!
(3) No reporter in Iran reported any such news, but, some “diplomats” succeeded in “becoming aware” about these facts.
(4) The diplomats did not reveal their identity, because, they knew that they may get into trouble, when the world comes to know about their rumours.

That fixes up the news...

PERSONAL VIEWS OF KM

Wow! Wow! Wow! Mr. KM! I really wanted such good & clear explanation of things. Let me dissect your views:-
>>>There are indeed many lines of evidence which suggest the US allowed 911 to happen. All I can say is I am glad that our leaders had the foresight to allow Muslims to attack New york and Washington.

You also wrote:
>>>What matters most from 911 is that the world recieved a much needed wakeup call to Islams intentions, 3000 people and a couple of buildings were worth the sacrifice.

And also wrote the following:
>>>We in the west are on to you
>>>if you cant see the problems that your so called religion of peace is causing across the globe then I will not feel sorry when you are vaporised by munitions which my tax dollars have paid for.

In the whole literature of Jihad Watch, I could not have found such a clear explanation of “Jihad Watch-ism.” What do you mean by all this if not that:-
(1) You want to “wipe” one-third of the world’s population “off the map.”
(2) US itself allowed 9/11 to happen, because, 9/11 paved path for the US leaders’ intentions. Your “leaders had the foresight” and in fact, they wanted 9/11 to happen so that they could “wipe” every third person (who is a Muslim) “off the map.” Expanding further, they would not hesitate to carry out 9/11 themselves for paving their path for this “cleansing” of muslims off the world!
(3) You are not sorry if a Muslim Sho’ah requires the destruction of the WTC and the killing of 3,000 innocent US citizens. You are gone mad; your heart has grown as hard as a rock. You don’t feel sorry to kill women, children, old ones, disabled, patients, etc. unless they agree that Islam is the cause of all evils.
You are a true JihadWatch-ist! Tomorrow, if your son/daughter says “Islam is good,” you won’t hesitate to “wipe” him/her “off” this earth! Your doctrine of “Anti-Muslim Jihad” is even worse than Robert Spencer’s scripture-twisting of the Islamic Jihad! You are a perfect fascist, who does not hesitate to force Muslims to accept that Islam is bad and if not, you will “wipe” him/her “off the map.” How could you accuse Muslims of spreading Islam by compulsion, in the past, when they didn’t do that and on top of that, you yourselves are stopping Islam from spreading, at the edge of a nuke (keep aside a sword!) We are feeling your opression, right here, right now! Your slogan is: “Curse Islam or else, lose your life!”
You have failed to even have sympathy for people of your own family, race, country, religion, etc. You can “wipe off” a US Citizen or a Christian if he thinks Islam is good. People like you cannot get united with anyone, on any basis: neither religion nor nationalism, unless he becomes a follower of your views.

Over all this, you may say: ‘They are all criminals.’ You also wrote in your post:
>>>(3) Muslims are ordered by their holy scripture to kill the infidels and jews.

Before answering this argument, I GIVE YOU AN OPEN CHALLENGE! Assuming that the Muslim population is 1 billion, go and travel every part of the world and ask the Muslims this question: ‘Is killing a non-muslim permissible, only because he is a non-muslim?’ I CHALLENGE YOU! IF YOU GET EVEN 0.001% OF THE MUSLIMS [UNLESS YOU FABRICATE THEM YOURSELVES OR DO SOME OTHER TREACHERY] SAYING “YES” TO THAT QUESTION, I WILL AGREE THAT ISLAM IS THE CAUSE OF ALL MISERIES. BUT, IF YOU FAIL AND YOU WILL FAIL, THEN THE CAUSE OF TROUBLE IS NOT ISLAM; IT’S YOU & OTHER SPENCER-TYPE CHARACTERS WHO ACT AS A VECTOR FOR THE DISEASE OF ISLAMOPHOBIA AND SPREAD MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT ISLAM. But, I think I should take my challenge back, the reason being YOUR untrustworthiness, because, you don’t hesitate to destroy the WTC and kill 3,000 innocent US citizens to pave path for a “Muslim” Sho’ah, so is it conceivable that you would not hesitate to fabricate false narrations for your ill intentions?
Now, coming to your argument; I will answer it with the help of what Mr. Champ said:
>>>You are quoting from Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, and it’s important to note that Jesus was speaking to “individuals” during that sermon, not to governmental organizations.

I will agree with YOUR interpretation of YOUR religious scripture, IF you agree with MY interpretation of MY religious scripture! So, will ya? IF yes, I can present my interpretation; IF no, then you have no right to stop me from interpreting your scripture, according to my desires!
Assuming, you will agree with my interpretation (and I challenge you to point out a defect in it), I am telling you the real & correct interpretation below:-
Before interpreting the Qur’an, you need to know the Rules of Interpretation of the Qur’an. There is a science of Interpretation of the Holy Qur’an, known as Usul-e-Tafseer. Usul-e-Tafseer does not mean “fucking virgins” or “killing Jews.” Usul means principles and Tafseer is derived from the root word ‘Fussaira’ meaning to explain. Thus Usul-e-Tafseer means the rules of interpretation of the Holy Qur’an.

The most important ayah which you should know before interpreting the Qur’an is:
“Summa Inna Alaina Bayaana” [Surah al-Qiyamah 75:19]
Translation: “Then, (O Muhammad P.B.U.H.) it is upon US (God) to explain it (i.e. the Qur’an.)”
This verse means that the MEANING OF THE QUR’AN IS DESCRIBED BY GOD HIMSELF. The following sayings of the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) elaborate the same point:-
Abdullah ibn Abbas (R.A.A.) reported that Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H.) said: “Whoever says something in interpreting the Qur’an based on his own opinion should find his place in the Fire.” (Tirmidhi)
Jundub, May Allah be pleased with him, reported that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Anyone who speaks on the Qur’an by his own opinion and is right is still wrong.” (Abu Dawud)

The knowledge of Tafseer was given to the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) and it was described by him:-
“And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad P.B.U.H.) the reminder and the advice (the Qur’an), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought.” [Surah An-Nahl 16:44]
This verse tells us two things:-
(i) The correct interpretation of the Qur’an was described by the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) himself
(ii) Giving one’s own thoughts on the Qur’an is after the description of the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) This means that the meaning of a particular verse cannot be circumscribed by one’s own thoughts; it should be in the light of the Prophet’s (P.B.U.H.) sayings.
So, to understand a verse, we should first take into account all the verses related to that matter. Then, we must search the Prophet’s (P.B.U.H.) traditions/sayings/actions (henceforth, Hadith [plural: Ahadith]) Then, the Companions (R.A.A.) and the Successors (R.A.) were the experts and their sayings must be taken into account. After searching all these, we still do not find anything, we can interpret an ayah (verse) according to the principles of the Arabic language and after that one can use deliberation & deduction.
All these constitute what are known as “The Sources of Tafseer.” These are 6 in total and are enumerated below:-
(1) The Qur’an itself
(2) The Ahadith
(3) The Sayings of the Companions (R.A.A.)
(4) The Sayings of the Successors (R.A.)
(5) The Arabic language
(6) Deliberation & deduction
Thus tafseer can be divided into two main types:-
(1) Tafseer bil Riwayah i.e. tafseer based on reports whose chain of transmission is traced back to sound sources.
(2) Tafseer bil Ra`yee i.e. tafseer on one’s own thoughts and opinions; this is concerned Haram (forbidden.)
One may raise a question here: ‘Why are there differences in the interpretation of Qur’an between the scholars?’ The reasons are:-
- Disregard for isnad (chain of transmission of a tradition)
- Genuine mistake in comprehension
- Interpretation based on unconscious preconceived notion
- Multiplicity of meanings in the revelation from Allah
- Difference in the rules regarding the reports (Ahadith)
One may also raise another question here: “Isn’t it possible for someone to do an interpretation, from the six sources, which completely distorts the meaning of the Qur’an?” The answer is to stick with Tafseer Wahbi i.e. a type of tafseer based on previous Tafaseer (plural of Tafseer.) Whenever someone coins a new interpretation for any verse, which has not been mentioned by any previous scholar, it is a sign of going astray from the correct meaning!
You can read this article regarding more knowledge of Usul-e-Tafseer:-
http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/Quran_Majid/intro_to_tafsir.html

This was only the Prologue for my interpretation of the verses regarding Jihad; if you haven’t understood it or did not read it completely/carefully, then I request you to go back and do it now!
Now, we come to the real task of interpreting the verses related to Jihad. We first enumerate the conditions under which Jihad is prohibited (Haram.)

(i) We find in Surah al-Anfaal, the following verse:-
“But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it, and (put your) trust in Allah. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.” [Surah Anfaal 8:61]
This verse shows that you cannot attack a nation if it “inclines to peace.” This means that launching Jihad against someone is prohibited if you have signed a peace treaty with it.

(ii) In Surah at-Touba, we find the following verse:-
“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger; (2) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the people of the Scripture: until they pay the Jezyah ‘Ayn Yaden Wa Hum Zaghiroon’” [Surah Touba 9:29]
I have retained some words in Arabic, because, if I translated them literally, this may cause someone to misinterpret the ayah. Remember, you cannot interpret an ayah, according to the 5th source i.e. the Arabic language, until you have searched the first four sources.
When we search the first four principles, we find that we cannot translate those words literally. Imam Shafi’i, who was of the successors (Taba’i Tab’ieen) and was a Mujtahid fi Shar’ah (highest rank of scholar), said regarding this ayah that in this ayah, ‘Yadeh’ is in the meaning of power/authority/sovereignty and ‘Ayn’ means “due to.” Furthermore, ‘Zaghiroon’ means that the non-muslims start obeying the common law (not any Personal law; they can follow their personal law.) This saying of Imam Shafi’i is also cited in Tafseer Ma`ariful Qur`an. Thus the ayat, if correctly explained, means that you cannot fight the citizens of a non-Muslim state (dhimmis) as long as they pay Jezyah (a low tax) and obey the General law of that Muslim country. In matters of personal law, they are free to follow their religion. Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H.) allowed the non-Muslims to follow their personal laws; he (P.B.U.H) accepted their marriages as valid and allowed them to eat pork and drink wine. [Cf. Ma’ariful Qur’an - English Edition, Mufti Muhammad Shafi, Vol.3, p.157]
Thus we came to know that the citizens of a non-Muslim state (dhimmis) are 100% safe and protected, if they fulfill their obligations i.e. paying Jezyah and obeying the common law.
(As I will explain shortly, those non-Muslims who did not fight personally against a Muslim army, in the battlefield, but, now their land has been conquered by the Muslims, THEY WILL BECOME DHIMMIS i.e. RESPECTFUL CITIZENS. They are NOT “Maal-e-Ghaneemat” (Booty of War) meaning that they do NOT become slaves or liable to death penalty. Those Spencer-type characters who spread such a misconception are themselves astray, because, they fail to distinguish b/w Maal-e-F`ay and Maal-e-Ghaneemat...)

(iii) Below is one of those ayahs which are most-often misinterpreted by non-Muslims:-
“Then when the Sacred Months (The 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them [in Mecca and Medina], and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform Salah and give Zakah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” [Surah at-Touba 9:5]
This ayah which if taken literally and out of context may make an “ignorant” non-Muslim jump out of his seat, but, actually it is being detached from the very next ayah, which is:-
“And if anyone of the polytheists seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear The Word of Allah (Qur’an), and then escort him to where he can be secure...” [Surah at-Touba 9:6]
From this ayah, we came to know that if a non-Muslim comes to a Muslim state after taking permission, which now-a-days is in the form of VISA/Passport, then it is incumbent upon the Muslims to protect him/her, until he/she reaches his own state/country. Such a non-Muslim who has entered a Muslim state after taking permission is known as “Mustam’ain” in the Islamic Fiqh.

I once read a review posted on Amazon by some non-Muslim. He wrote:

“To proceed to clarify some issues, let me use an example. The honorable late President John F. Kennedy during his Presidency and while the US was going to war with Vietnam said something to the effect, ‘Defend your country, show courage and galor, and fight all vietnamese whereever you see one.’ So do you still fight a vietnamese when you see one? No, this command was for that instance only. Hence, in the Quran, when Allah The AlMighty says: ‘fight the non-believers wherever you see one’ falls in the same category.”

(iv) From many verses of the Qur’an and ahadith, it becomes clear that if someone accepts Islam by saying the “Kalima” then it is prohibited to launch Jihad against him/it.

These were the conditions under which Jihad is impermissible; thus only two types of Jihad is permissible:-
(i) Defensive (Defa’i) Jihad
(ii) Offensive (Iqdami) Jihad
Defensive Jihad is self-explanatory i.e. if a non-Muslim state has attacked a Muslim state, they can do Jihad against them. When a non-Muslim state attacks a Muslim state, it is obligatory upon the Muslims of that country, as many are required, to do Jihad; if that state alone does not posses enough power, the obligation of Jihad extends to neighbouring countries. If even they do not posses enough power, the obligation extends to their neighbours and this obligation can extend, if required, to the all the Muslim states.
Offensive Jihad can be undertaken if the four conditions mentioned above are not fulfilled, for example, a non-Muslim state violates the peace treaty, etc. It can also be undertaken if a non-Muslim state is forcibly trying to convert Muslims to non-Muslims or stopping Muslims from preaching the teachings of Islam PEACEFULLY (Daw’ah.) According to some scholars, Offensive Jihad is impermissible also in the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar.

Then, there are other conditions which must be observed during Jihad, the details of which can be found in the books of Islamic Fiqh, for example, it is impermissible to fight with or kill women, children, aged ones, disabled, etc. Furthermore, it is impermissible to destroy crops, cut trees, destroy someone’s house, property, cattle, do un-Islamic acts like raping women or burning people or torturing them in any way, etc. If you want to know more, I can refer you to some books regarding these issues.

Someone may ask here: Isn’t it obligatory upon the Muslims to compell non-Muslims to convert to Islam? The answer is a big NO!!! There are 100% clear and explicit verses to answer this question directly:-

(1) “Let there be no compulsion in religion...” [Surah al-Baqarah 2:256]

(2) “Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity.
It is only as regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to befriend them. And whosoever will befriend them, then such are the wrong-doers.” [al-Mumtahinah 60:8-9]

(3) “...And (O Muhammad P.B.U.H.) say to those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and to those who are illiterates: (Arab pagans) ‘Do you (also) submit yourselves (to Allah in Islam)?’ If they do, they are rightly guided; but if they turn away, your duty is only to convey the Message...” [Aal-e-Imran 3:20]
(Noteworthy is the fact that if they turn away, our duty is to convey plainly; our duty is NOT to force them!)

(4) “Then if you turn away, you should know that it is Our Messenger’s duty to convey (the Message) in the clearest way.” [Surah al-Maida 5:92]
(5) “The Messenger’s [i.e. Muhammad’s (P.B.U.H.)] duty is but to convey (the Message.) And Allah knows all that you reveal and all that you conceal.” [Surah al-Maida 5:99]

(6) “The Messengers said: ‘Our Lord knows that we have been sent as Messengers to you,
And our duty is only to convey plainly (the Message).’” [Yaseen 36:16-17]

(7) “And if you deny, then nations before you have denied (their Messengers.) And the duty of the Messenger is only to convey (the Message) plainly.” [Surah al-Ankaboot 29:18]
“...(O Muhammad! P.B.U.H.) Say: ‘The signs are only with Allah, and I am only a plain warner.’” [Surah al-Ankaboot 29:50]

(8) “So remind them (O Muhammad P.B.U.H.), you are only a one who reminds.
You are NOT a DICTATOR over them [i.e. polytheists of Mecca].” [al-Ghashiyyah 88:21-22]

[These are only some of the verses which answer off that objection. The Qur’an is filled with such verses! Despite this fact, some people for their ulterior motives & reaping political benefits, don’t hesitate to take their eyes from these verses, either deliberately or due to their less knowledge and thus spread Islamophobia and end up astray.]

Okay, now I think there is nothing objectionable in the doctrine of Jihad for any sane person. Let me point out that this interpretation was not done by me; nay! I do not have enough knowledge to embark on such a daring task. The above description was actually an English translation of a Bayan (lecture) given by The Grand Mufti of Pakistan, Mufti Muhammad Rafi Usmaani (R.A.) at madrassa “Darul Uloom Karachi.” Below is the link to the written version of the lecture in Urdu language:-
http://www.geocities.com/al_Ijma/talwar.html
http://www.geocities.com/al_Ijma/talwar1.html
So, would you still prefer the opinion of a deviant, non-Muslim, false-scholar to the Grand Mufti of Pakistan? Do you ever prefer a quack to a doctor? If no, then why don’t you agree with the above given interpretation? Can you point out any defect or error?

>>> Had this not happened your demographic jihad would be continuing to this day without anyone in the west raising an eyebrow.
What do you mean by “Demographic” Jihad? If you mean that the Muslims are spreading Islam by pasting it on the sword, then I answered it in detail in some of my comments which I posted earlier in other articles. I would like to add one more point here:-

************** DIFFERENCE B/W MAAL-E-GHANEEMAT & MAAL-E-F`AY **************
Maal-e-Ghaneemat refers to those swords, shields, tools, etc. which have been taken/picked up from the site of the battle.
Maal-e-F`ay refers to the people, lands, etc. over which victory has been acheived.
Thus only the swords, shields, etc. which were picked up at the site of the battle will be divided among the Mujahiddeen & become their private property and the fifth-part of this Maal-e-Ghaneemat will be given in charity.
THE REST OF THE LAND WHICH HAS BEEN CONQUERED AFTER THE BATTLE IS MAAL-E-F`AY. IT IS NOT A PRIVATE PROPERTY OF THE MUJAHIDDEEN!!!!!
THE PEOPLE OF THAT LAND WILL BECOME RESPECTFUL CITIZENS, WHO ONLY HAVE TO OBEY THE GENERAL LAW & PAY A SMALL TAX (JEZYAH), IN WHICH RELIEF IS GIVEN TO THE POVERTY STRICKEN. THIS JEZYAH IS TAKEN FOR THE PROTECTION OF THEIR LIFE, SHELTER, FOOD, ETC. WHICH IS PROVIDED TO THEM BY THE MUSLIM STATE.
SUCH PEOPLE ARE CALLED DHIMMIS; YOU CONSIDER THE WORD ‘DHIMMI’ TO BE INSULTING ONLY BECAUSE YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND ARABIC AND ARE FOOLED BY OTHERS. DHIMMI LITERALLY MEANS A PERSON WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROTECTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY SOMEONE ELSE. IN THIS CASE, A NON-MUSLIM IS A DHIMMI IN A MUSLIM COUNTRY, BECAUSE, THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROTECTION OF HIS FOOD, SHELTER, LIFE, ETC. IS ON THE MUSLIM STATE; FOR ANY HARM TO IT, THE MUSLIM STATE WILL BE RESPONSIBILE FOR PROVIDING JUSTICE.
DHIMMI IS A RESPECTFUL WORD FOR NON-MUSLIMS AS IT SHOWS THAT THEIR RIGHTS CANNOT BE NEGLECTED! LOOK AT THIS HADITH:-
Narrated `Amr bin Maimun: `Umar (after he was stabbed), instructed (his would-be-successor) saying, “I urge him (i.e. the new Caliph) to take care of those non-Muslims who are under the protection of Allah and His Apostle in that he should observe the convention agreed upon with them, and fight on their behalf (to secure their safety) and he should not over-tax them beyond their capability.” [Sahih Bukhari, Vol.4, Bk.52]
(Umar R.A.A. was breathing his last, but, he was not worried of who killed him; rather, he was worried about the dhimmis!!! One can easily approximate the amount of care which non-muslims are given in a TRUE muslim state!)
ALAS! SOME PEOPLE, FOR REAPING PERSONAL BENEFITS, HAVE CREATED MISUNDERTSANDINGS! DHIMMIS COULD FOLLOW THEIR PERSONAL LAWS UNDER A ISLAMIC STATE, BUT, THEY MUST FOLLOW THE GENERAL LAW OF THE MUSLIM COUNTRY AND PAY JEZYAH.
What is bad in it?

If you mean by the term “Demographic Jihad” to mean that Muslims are rigorously trying to increase their population, then I would like to quote something from YOUR scripture:-
“Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labour in vain!” [Psalms, Chapter 127]
So, when even a house cannot be built without God’s consent and permission, then how can Muslims do “Jihad” (struggle) to “build” (within commas) children and increase their population rapidly??? If you still disagree, then you should also object those living in Israel, free of any birth control and doing “demographic Jihad.”

>>>it is obvious that you have access to information sources other than the koran...
Aren’t you trying to be a little sarcastic? What do you want to say if not that I am someone ‘special’ to have access to information sources other than the Qur’an? You guys sit here and keep on moving your tongues, without ever knowing the difference between a “Maktab” and a “Madrassa.” A maktab is a place where people go (usually in childhood) to learn reciting the Holy Qur’an only; they may also be taught books containing information about the Shari’ah rulings. A madrassa on the other hand serves as a ‘factory’ for producing expert & authentic Islamic scholars. They provide a 8 to 10 year “Aalim” course; most madrassas provide courses of Modern Sciences, English Language, Islamic Banking & Computer-related courses also now-a-days. A madrassa is not the first & last source of knowledge of these scholars; the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) has said: ‘Obtain knowledge from the [mother’s] lap to the grave!’ He (P.B.U.H.) also said: ‘Seek knowledge even if it be in China!’

(It is noteworthy here that the Madrassas’ management tries its best to keep their students away from Militancy and ESPECIALLY, POLITICS; the reason is that if these two things enter into Madrassas, then the aim of producing true Islamic scholars will not be possible. The scholars produced will then seek political power and their attention from education will be diverted. The madrassas are blamed for the US Government’s own actions! The textbooks given to Afghan children were filled with violent passages & images, and all this was portrayed as Jihad, even though it had nothing to do so with Jihad. These were not prepared by any Mullah or Maulvi; the textbooks were developed in the early 1980s under an AID [Agency for International Development] grant to the University of Nebraska-Omaha and its Center for Afghanistan Studies. The agency spent $51 million on the university´s education programs in Afghanistan from 1984 to 1994. These books were published in Pashtu and Dari languages and shocking as it may seem, An aid-worker in the region reviewed an unrevised 100-page book and counted 43 pages containing violent images or passages! REMEMBER, THESE BOOKS WERE NOT OF FIQH HANAFI OR SHIITE MAULVIS; THEY WERE MADE BY THE US THEMSELVES FOR PREPARING AN ARMY AGAINST THE SOVIET. If you want to know more about this, with references to authentic sources, read the article “Jihad & Jihadism” by Abid Ullah Jan. [ This article can be found on their website, by doing a little search; their website is: http://www.icssa.org/ ])
Muslim scholars all over the world are expert in other sciences, beside religious sciences. Even the Imam of my mosque can speak English and has knowledge of Modern Sciences as well. Then, another example is that of Retd. Justice Sheikh-ul-Hadith Mufti Maulana (name starts from here!) Muhammad Taqi Usmani sahib. He runs Darul Uloom Karachi in Pakistan, an Islamic institution in Jedah and is the head of the Islamic Department of the O.I.C. (Organization of Islamic Conference.) He was born in Deoband and studied at Darul Uloom, Deoband -- an institution which is severely hated by the British, due to its founder participating in the 1857 revolt. He is remarkable in the religious sciences and on the other hand, has studied Law and Economics, too. He used to be the Justice of Federal Shari’ah Court, Pakistan. The present Justice of Federal Shari’ah Court is Dr. Allama Khalid Mehmood; again, he is a scholar studied at a madrassa, but, expert and Ph.D. in other sciences as well! He runs a Islamic institution in Manchester (England) also. There are many many other examples like Mufti Muhammad Rafi, Sheikh Hamza (who studied Liberal Arts & Psychology), etc. From the town Raiwind (Pakistan) alone, every year, thousands of scholars leave to foreign countries for preaching the true teachings of Islam and removing doubts and misconceptions. It is impossible to preach Islam to the West in an alien language! Therefore, it is easy to see that ALL these scholars can speak English and out of them, 90% are those who study at Madrassas.
I wrote somewhere else on this issue as well; I can do copy-and-paste right here, but, the post would grow extremely huge!

>>> if you cant see the problems that your so called religion of peace is causing across the globe...
What problems is our religion of peace causing across the globe?
- The British estalished a company “East India Company” and then, illegally gained foothold in the sub-continent. They, then, very cleverly arrested the Mughal Emperor and sent him to Burma. After the 1857 revolt, many events took place, a few of which are listed below:-
(1) 51,200 ulema (scholars) were hanged with trees!
(2) For several days, muslims were killed openly.
(3) Some of the dead bodies, were sewed into the bodies of pigs...
(4) Some of the dead bodies were burnt...
(5) Some dead bodies were fitted in cannons and blasted off!
(6) The Jam`ai Mosque of Dehli was converted into a weapons depot!
(7) 24 prince were hanged on the same day in Dehli!
(8) Dehli was evacuated of Muslims... their properties and belongings were destroyed... their life was endangered...
[Note: Most of these events were done in accordance with special orders, which were sent from the British government to their viceroys in the sub-continent.]

- US ruthlessly threw a nuclear bomb, without even testing its effects, onto the innocent and harmless citizens of Hiroshima & Nagasaki and even today, those places seem to be “dead,” because, many people suffer from genetic diseases and other problems. It is noteworthy that Haryy Barnes has proved that Hitler did not want to fight America, but, it was President Roosevelt himself who wanted to plunge into WW-II, and only his treacheries made the incident of “Pearl Harbour” possible!

- Europeans did ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia Herzegovenia, in 1992 and a few “innocent” incidents which occured there, include:
(1) The abdomen of some pregenant women were busted open and after taking out everything, was sewed by thread and needle!
(2) Fathers were naked and sons were compelled to chew private parts of their fathers!!! Yuck!!!
(3) Children were killed and their parents were compelled to drink their blood!
(4) The heads of some people were cut off from their bodies and then, some christians were “playing football” with these heads!
(5) In the city of “Grad”, 70 people were burnt to death!
(6) Orthodox christians destroyed no less than 70 mosques!
(7) According to a newspaper report of 30th Oct. 1992, in 6 months, 10,000 muslims were killed!
(8) One day 8,000 muslims died, on which, they was a grand festival in an Orthodox church!
(9) One boy was ordered to commit adultery with the dead body of her mother!
(10) Sarajhuka Institute of Islamic Research was burnt which contained more than 1.5 million books and articles of Islam and Muslims.
(11) From some of the graves, three layers of dead bodies were recovered!

- Muslim holocaust in Iraq keeps on occuring on a regular basis; only on (previous) Sunday (maybe Saturday), 52 people lost their lives!

- Iraqi POWs were forced to chew the private parts of their companion prisoners, on a Special Executive Order issued by Mr. Bush [PDF Download: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/FBI.121504.4940_4941.pdf ]
Source & More Info here: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/powabuse.html
After coming to know about this, Senator Jim Inhofe said: ‘Many of them “probably” (not proved by evidence... Iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11) have American blood on their hands, and here we’re so concerned about the treatment of those individuals.’ [ http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/inhofe.avi ]
(There are million more facts regarding what is happening in Iraq; this Muslim holocaust is the gift of the tyrannt, President Bush, to the Muslim world.)

- It is important to note here that Hans Blix, the head of UNMOVIC, who presented regular reports to the Security Council, wrote in his report of 27 January 2003: “These reports do not contend that weapons of mass destruction remain in Iraq...” Furthermore, Bush himself has admitted that Saddam Housein was not involved in 9/11. Actually, research carried out by partriotic Americans (not Muslim extremists) provides a lot of evidence that the capture of Saddam Hussein is a half-baked farce! I quote here an excerpt from one of Stephen M. St. John’s letters:-

“First, is that really Saddam Hussein in captivity? Last year “Pravda” carried a report that on meeting the captive in Qatar last year, the wife of Saddam Hussein, Sajida Heiralla Tuffah, insisted he is NOT her husband. Married to Saddam for well over 25 years, this woman would surely know!

Moreover, there are two differing versions of the capture of Saddam Hussein, one in a hole in the ground and another in a house, but both are doubtful in that they purportedly occurred in the month of December when orange-yellow dates no longer hang in clusters on the date palm trees as they do in the background of photos taken at the publicized scene of capture. I never met a date tree that tells lies. Have you?

Also, photographic analysis by the late, great Australian investigator and internet journalist Joe Vialls indicates that the prisoner has a pronounced underbite with crooked lower frontal teeth whereas undisputed photos of Saddam show an overbite and beautiful, perfectly aligned frontal teeth. Of course Saddam was known to have employed doubles, which would easily confuse anybody who has never met the real Saddam in person.

Quite frankly, I have no idea what is going on and am skeptical of the reports I have been reading in the mainstream news media here in the United States. The bias is overwhelming and disheartening and, indeed, murderous. But I believe it is fair to say this: Only a meeting with the prisoner and family members in the presence of proper legal authorities as well as witnesses trusted by the family members would dispel any doubt about the true identity of the captive. Establishing the identity of the prisoner is a reasonable demand. Refusing to do so would be revelatory as well. But the demand must be made. Short of compliance, the demand must be made openly.”
Source: http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4wbps/id13.html

- US is threatening to attack Iran with nuclear B-61 bombs, despite enriching Uranium being an “inalienable right” of Iran & also, ignoring the fact that Iran cannot make any nuke in the near as well as the distant future. [Russian military expert, Yuri Balyuvsky said on InterFax]

- 9/11 was planned by Bush, CIA, etc. as I will show while replying Mr. Champ’s comments

- 7/7 was again a pre-planned attack; a good article by Webster G. Tarpley is available online:-
http://www.waronfreedom.org/lowdownonlondon.html
http://www.waronfreedom.org/londonslips.html
http://www.waronfreedom.org/londonbombs.txt
Below is the link to a video clip of an ex-Scotland Yard security consultant telling how the bombings occurred at the same times and stations as the “anti”-terror drill!
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/07/322342.shtml [With reference from Webster G. Tarpley’s article]
MORE IMPORTANT THINGS INCLUDE:-
(a) Reports carried out by The cross-party Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) and the Home Office have confirmed that two of the 7/7 bombers had been under MI-5 surveillance[1] before the bombings.
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/4329
[1] http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/171205ruled_out.htm

(b) Tony Blair used to be an MI-5 spy, according to Shayler.
Article: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/4351 (MUST READ!!!)
Source: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2005/201005blairspy.htm

(c) The ISC report claims that MI5 missed a “catalogue of clues” that could have prevented the bombings.
Source: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/7-july-report.pdf

(d) Initially, in the weeks after 7/7 it was reported that there WAS an Al Qaeda Mastermind behind both operations, and that he had been caught in Zambia.[2] Then, the official story changed that there is no mastermind and no Al-Qaeda involvement.[3] The reason was that the one caught in Zambia, Haroon Rashid Aswat, came out be an asset of MI-6![4]
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/4329
[2] http://www.theage.com.au/news/war-on-terror/london-bombings-mastermind-caught/2005/07/29/1122143994001.html
[3] http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/Aug05/130805bombings.htm
[4] http://www.infowars.com/articles/London_attack/mastermind_mi6_asset.htm

(e) Initial story was that the bombs were high powered explosives carefully created by a mastermind, who was apparently captured[5] and since then, disappeared. This story took a U-turn when it was said that the bombs were put together from cheap homemade material.[6]
[5] http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/LondonBlasts/story?id=941406
[6] http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/150705anothercontradiction.htm

See the full article: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/4329

- I can say very safely that in 99% of the cases, terrorist attacks are planned by Bush & his rogue networks, for fulfilling their dreams of “unipolarity” and conquering the world! Al-Qaeda is nothing but an excuse for crushing Muslim countries; in fact, there is tonnes of evidence available to prove this. Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, shortly before his death, told the House of Commons that “Al-Qaeda” is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.
Source: http://www.uruknet.info/.?p=17997

Some important extracts from an April-June 2004 article by Pierre-Henry Bunel, a former agent for French military intelligence, are as follows:
“I first heard about Al-Qaida while I was attending the Command and Staff course in Jordan...
Two of my Jordanian colleagues were experts in computers. They were air defense officers. Using computer science slang, they introduced a series of jokes about students’ punishment.
For example, when one of us was late at the bus stop to leave the Staff College, the two officers used to tell us: ‘You’ll be noted in ‘Qeidat il-Maaloomaat’ which meant ‘You’ll be logged in the information database.’ Meaning ‘You will receive a warning...’ If the case was more severe, they would used to talk about ‘Qeidat i-Taaleemaat.’ Meaning ‘the decision database.’ It meant ‘you will be punished.’ For the worst cases they used to speak of logging in ‘Al Qaida.’
...In the mid-1980s, Al Qaida was a database located in computer and dedicated to the communications of the Islamic Conference’s secretariat... Al Qaida remained the data base of the Islamic Conference. Not all member countries of the Islamic Conference are ‘rogue states’ and many Islamic groups could pick up information from the databases. It was but natural for Osama Bin Laden to be connected to this network. He is a member of an important family in the banking and business world.
WHEN OSAMA BIN LADEN WAS AN AMERICAN AGENT IN AFGHANISTAN, THE AL QAIDA INTRANET WAS A GOOD COMMUNICATION SYSTEM THROUGH CODED OR COVERT MESSAGES.”
Source: http://www.uruknet.info/.?p=17997

- You may have come across a news item regarding a bomb blast outside the US Consulate, in Karachi (Pakistan) on 3rd March, 2006. I, myself, prepared a small report regarding it and I can say safely that it was NOT a suicide attack, or at least no fanatic Muslim fundamentalist was involved in it; the report is available here:-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/3675
If you can’t read the above link fully, I just give you a simple description of the immense fabrication which was done by the Media, Intelligence Agencies & other Rogue Networks:-
On Friday, it was reported regarding the investigation of this blast: (See the full report for references)
(i) The “suicide” attacker was wearing Western style clothes with a cap of Pak Air Force
(ii) The cars used were a Suzuki Mehran and Cultus having numbers AGS-373 and ACD-317 respectively
(iii) The cars used were snatched away from North Nizamabad, Karachi
Then, on Saturday as soon as the FBI arrived, the facts changed thus:
(i) The “suicide” attacker was wearing a typical Shalwar-Kameez tunic, with a grey beard and a turban.
(ii) The car used was a Toyota Corolla filled with explosives
(iii) The car was snatched away from Lahore
Do you believe in all this? If you have a brain, you can easily think out what is the problem with the above blast. I request you to read the above mentioned report fully.

- We live in an age of Synthetic Terror! This is 100% true! Read these articles regarding this issue:-

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/4317

NOTE!
(1) According to a Zogby poll taken in 2005, 48% of the citizens of New York are skeptic about the investigation of 9/11 & believe that there has been a cover-up!!!
Source: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855

(2) A team of over 30 experts in the field of in the fields of science, engineering, architecture, intelligence, military, medicine, Islamic studies and other disciplines has been formed, known as SPINE i.e. Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven. Their website is: http://www.physics911.net/
Below is an extract from an e-mail sent by the coordinator of SPINE, Mr. A.K.Dewdney to the War On Freedom Yahoo! Group:
(Note that the original text is in RTF and many words are hyperlinked to various URLs...)

“The evidence is in, the analyses have been made, and conclusions have been drawn by scientists, engineers and other experts: the so-called terror attacks of September 11, 2001 were faked. There is, moreover, independent evidence from multiple and credible sources that Al Qaeda is the creation of western spy agencies.
If you have any questions concerning these assertions, visit http://www.physics911.net
The Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven has formed around this website. The Panel consists of over thirty experts in the fields of science, engineering, architecture, intelligence, the military, medicine, Islamic studies and other disciplines. The members are willing to stand up and be counted, even the ones with the highest public profiles...
Of course, the Physics 911 website is hardly alone in cyberspace. There are now literally hundreds of skeptical websites on the internet (with only a handful of dissenting sites defending the official story). There are other working groups with websites, as well, not to mention thousands of people doing their own inquiries into 911 and millions of people skeptical of the official story (including 48% of New Yorkers, according to a Zogby poll taken in 2005).
We are now living in what has been called the Age of Synthetic Terror. In contrast to the corporate media line, “terrorism” is the brainchild and product of western intelligence agencies. Its purpose is to foment domestic anger at Muslims in order to justify a program of a) invasion of sovereign nations, b) seizure of their oil resources, c) mass murder designed to look like sectarian violence, d) establishing permanent military bases and e) the installation of puppet governments in the countries so affected.
It follows that the mass murder of 9/11, blamed on Arab/Muslim patsies, was but the opening scene of a drama that would have many acts, with hundreds of thousands of murders to follow.
There is one and only one way to bring this program of synthetic terror to an end. The knowledge that we have acquired must be made public and made public soon. The next massive military operation may be against Iran. Such an attack would require a triggering episode in which a handful of Muslims, Iranian this time, would be blamed for the bombing of a western target, possibly involving a nuclear device, given the (pretended) concern over Iran’s nuclear program. (Think Iraq. Think WMDs.)
How long will it take members of the corporate media to break free with this story? Their colleagues may be unaware that the country of Venezuela has undertaken an international inquiry into 9/11. They may be unaware that Charlie Sheen’s allegations are but the tip of an iceberg or unaware of the deception in Iraq or that the Osama tapes are faked.
The story is yours.
A. K. Dewdney
Coordinator Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven”

Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarOnFreedom/message/2907

All these researchers are US citizens and patriots, not anti-Americans. They are not Muslim extremists or fundamentalists. I LOVE ALL THESE PEOPLE! WE MUSLIMS ARE SERIOUSLY INDEBTED TO THEM FOR THEIR RESEARCH! THEY HAVE REMOVED THE STIGMA OF TERRORISM FROM THE NAME OF OUR RELIGION! I LOVE WEBSTER G. TARPLEY, DAVID RAY GRIFFIN, DEWDNEY, DAVID MORRISON, VERMONTER GREG NIXON, WRH AND THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF OTHER AMERICANS WHO HAVE DONE RESEARCH. What is the relationship between them and us? There is only one relation and that is the relation of Humanity. They spent their time in doing research, which they could have spent in watching NBA finals or enjoying it with their family members. THEY DESERVE GREAT GREAT GREAT CREDIT FOR THEIR EFFORTS!
BUT, WHERE ARE THE MUSLIMS? THEY ARE SLEEPING! YEAH, 99% OF THE MUSLIMS DON’T TAKE ANY PAINS TO TAKE THE STIGMA OF 9/11 OFF THEIR RELIGION. NEITHER THE MEDIA NOR THE PEOPLE HAVE MADE ANY EFFORT IN THIS REGARD. 99% of the Muslims have neither done any research, nor do they want to do any research. If at all they are concerned about 9/11, they would say in an angry rhetoric: “Bush did it himself!” or “The Jews are behind this!” But, what all this means? NOTHING; ABSOLUTE ZERO. They don’t have even a single piece of evidence in support of it! In fact, their attitude of blaming without evidence has caused non-Muslims to rather provoke them for blaming everything on the Jews.

Okay, I think I have done enough to answer off one of your arguments. Now, coming to the second big argument:-
>>>(2) Israel, Brazil and Japan haven’t recently threatend to wipe any countries off the map.
This again requires detailed explanation, but, first let me do two things.
Firstly, Iranian President is not talking about destroying Israel completely and in fact, his statements regarding Holocaust mostly focus on the unjust exploitation of Holocaust. For more information which I am sure you need, read this article:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm

Secondly, I will analyze your statement. When I analyze this statement, I find a few crucial facts and misconceptions accumulated in your mind. A few things which are apparent from the statement are:-
(i) The style of your statement reveals that in your mind, there is absolutely no difference between Brazil (or Japan) and Israel. In other words, in your view, Israel is as respectful a country as is Brazil or Japan.
(ii) In your view, Israel like Brazil or Japan has not threatened any country. In other words, no country is in danger from the existence of Israel.
(iii) In your view, Israel is as peaceful as Brazil or Japan is.
All these facts, have a common root, a common foundation which is that there is no difference between Israel & other respectful and peaceful countries of the world.
To refute your argument, I only have to pull out this foundation. This requires a great amount of explanation, but, if I put my explanation in the least words, then it consists of three facts:
(a) Israel came into being through terrorism
(b) Israel is standing today only on the basis of terrorism
(c) Some Muslim countries are reluctantly trying to accept Israel and talk with it, only because of its immense terrorist capabilites
These are the three points which I need to fully elaborate to refute your argument, so, bit-by-bit I take a byte.

ISRAEL’S HISTORY

We have to go way back to the early days of the Zionist Movement to find out the roots of the Palestine problem. There is a very good book of about 96 pages available on the internet which explains the Origin of the Palestine problem; the URL is:
http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/aeac80e740c782e4852561150071fdb0?OpenDocument
This is a brilliant & extensive book containing annexed maps, references to other books, reference to Weizmann’s personal diary, parliamentary files & papers and much more! It will take about 2 or 2-1/2 hours to finish this book in one sitting, which is not a very easy job! I have summarized the main points, but, if you don’t agree with them, I request you to read the book FIRST before throwing any arguments.
The origin of the Palestine problem goes way back, in fact, at a time when the Ottoman Empire was still intact.
(1) In 1916 negotiations between Britain, France and Russia, later also including Italy, led to the secret Sykes-Picot agreement on the allocation of Ottoman Arab territories to spheres of influence of the European Powers, but, these European Powers recognized that the sovereignty would rest with the rulers and people of the Arab. (See Annex I in the above book)
(2) During 1915-1916, Emir of Mecca, Sherif Husain, demanded “independence of the Arab countries,” and specified in detail the boundaries of the territories in question, which INCLUDED PALESTINE. Sir Henry McMahon, British High Commissioner in Egypt, confirmed: “Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of the Arabs in all the regions within the limits demanded by the Sherif of Mecca.”
(3) A special message (of 4 January 1918) from the British Government, carried personally by Commander David George Hogarth to Sherif Husain and A joint Anglo-French declaration (7 November 1918) ensured that Palestine was included in the Arab states which are to be made independent and sovereign.
(4) While these British assurances of independence to the Arabs were in unequivocal terms, the British position, since the end of the war, had been that Palestine had been excluded. THIS WAS A PRE-PLANNED ATROCITY, AS I SHOW IN A MOMENT. During the Husain-McMahon correspondence, the British made a determined effort to exclude certain areas from the territories to achieve independence, on the grounds that “the interests of our ally, France, are involved.” Sherif Husain reluctantly agreed to suspend, but not surrender, Arab claims for independence to that area, stating that “the eminent minister should be sure that, at the first opportunity after this war is finished, we shall ask you (from what we avert our eyes today) for what we now leave to France in Beirut and its coasts.”
The area in question had been described by McMahon as “portions of Syria lying to the west of the districts of Damascus, Homs, Hama and Aleppo.” This clearly excluded Palestine and only included coastal areas of present-day Syria and northern part of Lebanon. (See Annex II of above book for map) In 1939, shortly after the Husain-McMahon papers were made public, a committee consisting of both British and Arab representatives was set up to consider this specific issue. The Arabs said that Palestine was excluded from the areas in question, whereas, British said that Palestine was included. Although, the Committee concluded that the wishes of the people of Palestine should be taken into account, this was still unjust as the pledges of the British government were quite clear. THIS WAS A PRE-PLANNED ATROCITY AS I SHOW IN A MOMENT.
Anyways, we must know who was right and who was wrong. The truth that the Arab interpretation was correct, was agreed by Professor Arnold J. Toynbee, a member of the British Foreign Offince at the time of The Peace Conference. (See above book, end-note 8) Similarly, the final word on this issue came up in “The Times” issue of 17 April, 1974. They published excerpts from a secret memorandum prepared by the Political Intelligence Department of the British Foreign Office for the use of the British delegation to the Paris peace conference. The extracts included the following text:
“With regard to Palestine, His Majesty’s Government are committed by Sir Henry McMahon’s letter to the Sherif on October 24, 1915, to its inclusion in the boundaries of Arab independence...”
“The whole of Palestine ... lies within the limits which His Majesty’s Government have pledged themselves to Sherif Husain that they will recognize and uphold the independence of the Arabs.”
BUT OF WHAT USE IS THIS TEXT NOW? WHEN THE ARABS WERE SHOUTING FOR JUSTICE, NO ONE CAME FORWARD TO CLARIFY THE ISSUE, BUT, WHEN EVERYTHING WAS OVER, THEY AGREED THAT THE ARABS WERE CORRECT!

Now, we come to the other side of this story i.e. the Zionist movement!

(5) Theodor Herzl, founder of the Zionist movement, wrote (in about 1896) in his personal diary (which has been published; see above book) regarding the first Zionist Congress held in Basle:
“Were I to sum up the Basle Congress in a word - which I shall guard against pronouncing publicly - it would be this: at Basle I founded the Jewish State ... If I said this out loud today, I would be answered by universal laughter. Perhaps in 5 years and certainly in 50 everyone will know it.” (see above book, foot-note 10)
Following rejection by the Ottoman authorities of his ideas, Herzl approached the British, German, Belgian and Italian Governments and such far-flung locations as Cyprus, East Africa and the Congo were considered, but did not materialize. The creation of a Jewish State in Palestine became the avowed aim of zionism, zealously pressed by Dr. Chaim Weizmann when he came to head the movement.

(6) Since Palestine was an integral part of the Ottoman Empire, the Zionist Organization was cautious in declaring its aims, particularly after the young Turk revolution. The term “State” was avoided, “homeland” being used instead. Herzl wrote: “No need to worry [about the phraseology.] The people will read it as ‘Jewish State’ anyhow.” (see above book, foot-note 12) Although seriously denied by Zionist historians, but proved from Herzl’s own writings, the goal of Zionism from the start, as expressed in the form of a slogan was: “A land without people for a people without land.” But, they never realized that Palestine was filled with Muslims and also Christians. Whenever they were reminded of this, they went mad! (See above book, footnote 15) The Jewish homeland, as claimed by the Zionists, is much larger than the present Israel (see Annex VI of above book for map) and the Zionists are striving hard to enlarge their homeland.

(7) Dr. Weizmann’s approaches to various Governments led him to conclude that Zionism’s strongest hopes for a Jewish State in Palestine, tentatively destined for internationalization under the Sykes-Picot agreement, lay with Great Britain. Links with British leaders were established, notably with Lloyd George, a future Prime Minister, Arthur Balfour, a future Foreign Secretary, Herbert Samuel, a future High Commissioner of Palestine, and Mark Sykes. Weizmann highly endorsed Sykes for his services rendered. (See above book, footnote 17) Sykes was especially valuable in helping Weizmann and his colleagues, particularly Nahum Sokolow, in trying to persuade France to renounce its residual claims in the internationalized Jerusalem agreed upon in the Sykes-Picot accord. Original French ambitions had embraced all of Syria, including Palestine, to whose internationalization it had agreed only on strong British insistence. Eventually the French were persuaded to accept “the development of Jewish colonization in Palestine” (see above book, foot-note 23) and let Palestine pass into the British sphere of control.

(Remember, I have eaten away a lot of things; you can read the book for full details.)

(8) Weizmann writes:
“The time had come, therefore, to take action, to press for a declaration of policy in regard to Palestine on the part of the British Government; and toward the end of January 1917, I submitted to Sir Mark Sykes the memorandum prepared by our committee, and had several preliminary conferences with him... The document was called: ‘Outline of Programme for the Jewish Resettlement of Palestine in accordance with the Aspirations of the Zionist movement.’ Its first point had to do with national recognition:
‘The Jewish population of Palestine (which in the programme shall be taken to mean both present and future Jewish population), shall be officially recognized by the Suzerain Government as the Jewish Nation, and shall enjoy in that country full civic, national and political rights. The Suzerain Government recognizes the desirability and necessity of a Jewish resettlement of Palestine.’” (See above book, foot-note 25)
Actually there were about six drafts exchanged and discussed between the British Government and the Zionist movement, United States assent also being obtained before the British Foreign Secretary issued the final text of the Balfour Declaration in November 1917.
LET ME CLARIFY ONE THING HERE: THERE WAS NO THOUGHT OF CONSULTING THE PALESTINIANS!!!!!

(9) The Balfour Declaration was issued by the British Foreign Office in 2 November, 1917. The text of this declaration was:
“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
Two dreams of the Zionists had been shattered:-
(a) The Balfour Declaration used the word A national home, whereas, the Zionists wanted THE national home! The British gave safe-guard to non-Zionists jews who opposed the idea. Foremost amongst them were Sir Edwin Montagu and Ahad Ha’am, both being jews.
(b) The Declaration took away the need for discussing the “best endeavours” with the Zionist organization
Weizmann was sensitive to these changes. (See above book, foot-note 31) But, he still chose to remain silent for political reasons. It must be noted here what Weizmann wrote:-
“The first adds only that the “Government will use its best endeavours to secure the achievement of this object and will discuss the necessary methods with the Zionist Organization”; the second introduced the subject of the “civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities” in such a fashion as to impute possible oppressive intentions to the Jews, and can be interpreted to mean such limitations on our work as completely to cripple it.” (See foot-note 31)
THIS IS 100% CLEAR; WEIZMANN KNEW THAT IF THE WISHES OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE WERE TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, THEIR WORK WERE TO BE COMPLETELY CRIPPLED!
Weizmann also said in clear terms to the people of Palestine:-
“We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you like it or not... You can hasten our arrival or you can equally retard it. It is however better for you to help us so as to avoid our constructive powers being turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the world.” [Chaim Weizmann, Published in “Judische Rundschau,” No. 4, 1920]
THIS ALONE IS AN EYE-OPENER FOR ANY SANE GUY!!!!

Now, we come to the Balfour declaration to discuss a few things which were left-over:-
(I) While the French, British, Zionist, Americans, etc. were consulted before drafting this declaration, there was no thought of consulting the actual people of Palestine, whether they resist or hasten this Zionist idea
(II) The disposition of Palestine was determined in close consultation with a political organization whose declared aim was to settle non-Palestinians in Palestine. Not only did this ignore the interests of the native Palestinians, but it was a deliberate violation of their rights! (See above book, section IV)
(III) The pledges given to the Arab people i.e. to their representative Sherif Hussein, through Sir Henry McMahon, were also shattered by this declaration. The British knew that they had already pledged to form independent sovereign Arab states in various areas, including Palestine, but, at the same time, they agreed to the idea of a sovereign Jewish state/homeland in Palestine.
(IV) while the prejudice to “the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” was mentioned in principle (not in practice), yet their is no mention of the “Political rights” of those communities; NOT EVEN IN THEORY, KEEP ASIDE IN PRACTICE!
(V) Through this Declaration, the British Government made commitments to the Zionist Organization regarding the land of the Palestinians at a moment when it was still formally part of the Ottoman Empire!

The legal weight of the Balfour Declaration must also be discussed. In an article published in 1957 “The Legal Basis for the State of Israel” in the American Bar Association Journal, it has been pointed out that the Balfour Declaration is legally impotent. (See above book, foot-note 38) Other authorities in law have also held it to be legally invalid. (See above book, foot-note 39)
The reason as observed by The American Bar Association Journal is: “Great Britain had no sovereign rights over Palestine, it had no proprietary interest, it had no authority to dispose of the land. The Declaration was merely a statement of British intentions and no more.” (See above book, foot-note 38)

...
The Zionist Organization was to use the assurances for “a national home for the Jewish people” to press its plans for the colonization of Palestine on the basis of the Balfour Declaration and its implementation through the League of Nations Mandates System. The Palestinian people were to resist these efforts, since their fundamental political right to self-determination had been denied, and their land was to become the object of colonization from abroad during the period it was under a League of Nations Mandate.

(10) A major question facing the victorious European Powers was the political status of territories and peoples formerly under Ottoman rule. Of President Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” outlining the framework of the peace agreements to be negotiated, the one dealing with self-determination was directly applicable to Palestine:
“The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development...”
The Allied Powers, however, decided at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 to bring these territories under the mandates system introduced by the Covenant of the League of Nations, signed on 28 June 1919, as an integral part of the Treaty of Versailles which concluded peace with Germany.
Article 22 (full text at annex IV of above book) of the Covenant established the Mandates System, founded on the concept of the development of such territories under the “tutelage ... of advanced nations” formed “a sacred trust of civilization.” The degree of tutelage was to depend on the extent of political maturity of the territory concerned. The most developed would be classified as ‘A’ Mandates, the less developed as ‘B’, and the least developed as ‘C’.
The character of the Arab peoples, themselves inheritors of an ancient and advanced civilization, could not but be recognized, and the clauses directly applied to Arab lands as class ‘A’ Mandates read:
“Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.”
Palestine was in no manner excluded from these provisions... The administration of Syria and Lebanon was awarded to France, and that of Palestine and Transjordan and of Mes

(Don't know what happened... post broke in the middle... continued from previous...)

(10) A major question facing the victorious European Powers was the political status of territories and peoples formerly under Ottoman rule. Of President Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” outlining the framework of the peace agreements to be negotiated, the one dealing with self-determination was directly applicable to Palestine:
“The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development...”
The Allied Powers, however, decided at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 to bring these territories under the mandates system introduced by the Covenant of the League of Nations, signed on 28 June 1919, as an integral part of the Treaty of Versailles which concluded peace with Germany.
Article 22 (full text at annex IV of above book) of the Covenant established the Mandates System, founded on the concept of the development of such territories under the “tutelage ... of advanced nations” formed “a sacred trust of civilization.” The degree of tutelage was to depend on the extent of political maturity of the territory concerned. The most developed would be classified as ‘A’ Mandates, the less developed as ‘B’, and the least developed as ‘C’.
The character of the Arab peoples, themselves inheritors of an ancient and advanced civilization, could not but be recognized, and the clauses directly applied to Arab lands as class ‘A’ Mandates read:
“Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.”
Palestine was in no manner excluded from these provisions... The administration of Syria and Lebanon was awarded to France, and that of Palestine and Transjordan and of Mesopotamia (Iraq) to Great Britain. (Read full book for details)

(11) All the mandates over Arab countries, including Palestine, were treated as class ‘A’ Mandates, applicable to territories whose independence had been provisionally recognized in the Covenant of the League of Nations. The various mandate instruments were drafted by the Mandatory Powers concerned but subject to the approval of the League of Nations.
Syria and Lebanon were governed under the full control of France until the Mandate was terminated. Lebanon achieved full independence on 22 November 1943 and Syria on 1 January 1944. Palestine and Transjordan (as it was then called) were included in the same Mandate but treated as distinct territories. Article 25 of the Palestine Mandate empowered Great Britain to withhold, with the League’s approval, the implementation of any provision of the Mandate in Transjordan. On the request of the British Government the Council of the League, on 16 September 1922, passed a resolution effectively approving a separate administration for Transjordan. This separate administration continued until the territory attained independence as the Kingdom of Jordan on 22 March 1946.
Only in the case of Palestine did the Mandate, with its inherent contradictions due to the incorporation of the illegal and immoral Balfour Declaration, lead not to the independence provisionally recognized in the Covenant, but towards conflict that was to continue six decades later. Weizmann wanted to make this issue of a Jewish home in Palestine, to be an International issue. He wrote: “It means going to the nations and saying, ‘we need your help to achieve our aim.’” [See above book, foot-note 41]

(12) The first move was to dispatch to Palestine in April 1918 of a Zionist Commission consisting of Dr. Weizmann and Zionist representatives from France and Italy, accompanied by British officials. This Commission described its objective as to carry out any steps required to give effect to government declaration in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a natinoal home for the Jewish people. Weizmann was apparently talking about the establishment of good relations with the Arabs and other non-Jewish communities and to remove “misconceptions” about the aim of Zionism.The Military Governor, Colonel (later Sir) Ronald Storrs, commented:
“I cannot agree that, as Dr. Weizmann would seem to suggest, it is the business of the military authorities to ‘bring home to the Arabs and Syrians the fact that His Majesty’s Government has expressed a definite policy with regard to the future of the Jews in Palestine.’ This has already been done by Mr. Balfour in London, and by the press throughout the world. What is wanted is that the Zionists themselves should bring home to the Arabs and Syrians an exposition at once as accurate and conciliatory as possible of their real aims and policy in the country...”
Similarly, when the Commission completed its stay in Palestine, many proposals were submitted to the Foreign Office for consideration at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Lord Curzon (then Foreign Secretary and formerly Viceroy of India and Lord President of the Council) commented to Balfour on these proposals:
“... As for Weizmann and Palestine, I entertain no doubt that he is out for a Jewish Government, if not at the moment then in the near future ...
What all this can mean except Government I do not see. Indeed a Commonwealth as defined in my dictionary is a ‘body politic’ a ‘State’ an ‘independent community’ a ‘republic.’
I feel tolerably sure therefor that while Weizmann may say one thing to you, or while you may mean one thing by a national home, he is out for something quite different. He contemplates a Jewish State, a Jewish nation, a subordinate population of Arabs, etc. ruled by Jews; the Jews in possession of the fat of the land, and directing the Administration.
He is trying to effect this behind the screen and under the shelter of British trusteeship.
I do not envy those who wield the latter, when they realize the pressure to which they are certain to be exposed.” [See above book, foot-note 44]
The delegation of the Hijaz (now Saudi Arabia), led by Sherif Husain’s son, Emir Feisal, was the only Arab delegation at the Conference, and presented the Arab case for independence, although their credentials were not recognized by all Arab leaders. Feisal relied heavily for guidance on the British Government, which had sponsored his participation in the Conference. He presented a brief memorandum dated 1 January 1919 to the Paris Peace Conference in which he only implied acceptance of a mandate.

(13) During meetings on the mandates question of the Allied Supreme Council, President Wilson declared that “one of the fundamental principles to which the United States of America adhered was the consent of the governed” and proposed the dispatch of an inter-allied commission “... to elucidate the state of opinion and the soil to be worked on by any mandatory.” This proposal materialized in the “King-Crane” Commission, and it was agreed that its jurisdiction would include Palestine. For their own reasons both Britain and France did not nominate members to the Commission. President Wilson appointed two Americans, Henry King and Charles Crane.
Soon after the Commission arrived in Damascus, Arab nationalists, meeting as the “General Syrian Congress,” including representatives from Lebanon and Palestine, adopted a resolution to be presented to the Commission. The resolution asked for full independence for Syria (including Lebanon and Palestine), rejecting any form of foreign influence or control. The resolution included the first formal declaration of Arab opposition to the Zionist plans being made for Palestine. (See above book for full text) The Commission’s report recommended that, in view of the opposition to French influence, consideration be given to an American mandate over Syria. The portions dealing with Palestine recommended:
“... serious modification of the extreme Zionist programme for Palestine of unlimited immigration of Jews, looking finally to making Palestine distinctly a Jewish State ...”
Referring to President Wilson’s preparation of the principle of self-determination, the Commission stated:
“If that principle is to rule, and so the wishes of Palestine’s population are to be decisive as to what is to be done with Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine - nearly nine-tenths of the whole - are emphatically against the entire Zionist programme. The tables show that there was no one thing upon which the population of Palestine were more agreed than upon this. To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principle just quoted, and of the peoples’ rights though it kept within the forms of law...”
“The Peace Conference should not shut its eyes to the fact that the anti-Zionist feeling in Palestine and Syria is intense and not lightly to be flouted. No British Officer consulted by the Commissioners believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by force of arms. The officers generally thought that a force of not less than 50,000 soldiers would be required even to initiate the programme. That of itself is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist programme, on the part of the non-Jewish populations of Palestine and Syria. Decisions, requiring armies to carry out, are sometimes necessary, but they are surely not gratuitously to be taken in the interests of a serious injustice. For the initial claim, often submitted by Zionist representatives, that they have a “right” to Palestine, based on an occupation of two thousand years ago, can hardly be seriously considered.” (See foot-note 51 of above book)
DOES ISRAEL STAND TODAY? IF YES, THEN HOW IS IT POSSIBLE IF 90% OF THE PEOPLE LIVING THERE WERE AGAINST IT? YES, BY FORCE, TERROR AND ALL OTHER ILLEGAL MEANS. THESE THINGS ARE SOME OF THOSE WHICH ARE NEVER MENTIONED BY THE WEST; THEY ARE HIDDEN & FORGOTTEN FACTS, WHICH NO ONE DARES TO MENTION AND ALL BLAME IS PUT ON THE ARABS. PEOPLE DON’T SEE THE IMMENSE INJUSTICES DONE TO THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE & ARE MERELY DECEIVED BY THE TRICKS OF THE MEDIA.
THE MEDIA ONLY MENTIONS ONE THING AND THAT IS: THE ARABS HATE JEWS & SO, THEY ARE AGAINST ISRAEL. BUT, IS IT SO? NO!

(14) The Commission’s recommendations received little attention and in any case were to become moot with the United States’ decision to stay out of the League. Meanwhile, the actual policy for Palestine was being given final shape. Balfour told Justice Brandeis, leader of the Zionist movement in the United States:
“The situation is further complicated by an agreement made early in November (1918) by the British and French, and brought to the President’s attention, telling the people of the East that their wishes would be consulted in the disposition of their future;... Palestine should be excluded from the terms of reference because the Powers had committed themselves to the Zionist programme which inevitably excluded numerical self-determination. Palestine presented a unique situation. We are dealing not with the wishes of an existing community but are consciously seeking to reconstitute a new community and definitely building for a numerical majority in the future ...” (See foot-note 52 of above book)
Yeah! This is the reality; they knew themselves that if the principle of self-determination and taking into account, the wishes of the existing communities, was to be exercised, it would mean a complete failure of Zionism. Yet, I am surprised that people blame the Arabs of doing injustice and not accepting Israel.
In a memorandum to Lord Curzon on 11 August 1919, Balfour candidly wrote:
“The contradiction between the letters of the Covenant and the policy of the Allies is even more flagrant in the case of the ‘independent nation’ of Palestine than in that of the ‘independent nation’ of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country, though the American Commission has been going through the form of asking what they are.
The four Great Powers are committed to zionism. And zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.
In my opinion that is right. What I have never been able to understand is how it can be harmonized with the (Anglo-French) declaration of November 1918, the Covenant, or the instructions to the Commission of Enquiry.” (See foot-note 53 of above book)

The final disposition of Palestine was decided by the Allied Supreme Council at the San Remo Conference on 25 April 1920. The process has been described as follows:
“The allocation of the Mandate was for several reasons a slow process. In the first place, it hung upon the Anglo-French agreement as to the validity of the Sykes-Picot arrangements for the whole of the ex-Turkish territories, and this was held up by discord over Syria and Mosul, involving discussions très vives de ton between Clemenceau and Mr. Lloyd George. As a result of the compromise, Palestine, which had under the Sykes-Picot plan been destined for international administration, in the end passed by mutual consent into British tutelage.” (See foot-note 55 of above book)
BUT, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that the decision was taken without any heed to the requirement of article 22 of the Covenant that “the wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of a Mandatory.”
ALL THESE THINGS ARE THOSE “FORGOTTEN” FACTS WHICH ARE NOT MENTIONED IN YOUR TEXT-BOOKS!

(15) The Mandate was drafted after many revisions and the Mandate was seriously criticized by Italian and French governments. When the question of the British Mandate over Palestine was discussed in Parliament, it became clear that opinion in the House of Lords was strongly opposed to the Balfour policy, as illustrated by the words of Lord Sydenham in reply to Lord Balfour:
“... the harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country - Arab all around in the hinterland - may never be remedied ... what we have done is, by concessions, not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, to start a running sore in the East, and no one can tell how far that sore will extend.” (See foot-note 60 of above book)
The House of Lords voted to repeal the Balfour Declaration, but a similar motion was defeated in the House of Commons and the British Government formally accepted the Mandate. The Zionist Organization however, succeeded in having its formulation concerning “historical connection” and “reconstitution” of the “national home” included in the final text of the Mandate (annex V) which was approved by the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, and came into formal effect in September 1923 when the Treaty of Lausanne with Turkey came into force. It thus gave international sanction - which then meant the sanction of the victorious Allied Powers - to the Balfour Declaration, and determined the direction of developments in Palestine. (You can read more info about it in the book)
The Mandate provided for no body to serve the interests of the Palestinian people, similar to the Jewish Agency given official status. Nor were the Palestinians ever consulted in the choice of the mandatory, as required by article 22 of the Covenant. The only move towards consultation had been the American King-Crane Commission, whose views were ignored. The United States, however, had become associated with the Balfour Declaration’s policy through a joint Congressional resolution incorporating the Declaration’s language. Three years later the Anglo-American Convention of 1925 formalized United States’ consent to the implementation of a Mandate embedded with conflicting obligations, and in which the inherent political rights of the Palestinian people had been overridden.

It’s enough for me; my summary is almost the same as that of the book. I think the rest you should read from the book; I can’t find enough time to summarize the rest. In the above book, you will tables regarding immigration, maps, extracts and much better explanation than my junky versions! ANYWAYZ, I MENTIONED MANY THINGS WHICH YOU WON’T FIND IN NORMAL TExTBOOKS!!! The URL is given again:
http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/aeac80e740c782e4852561150071fdb0?OpenDocument
You will find many things there and I think it’s better to read it completely. You will come to know that the Peel Commission Report pointed out that the establishment of the national home for the Jews is an injustice to the Arabs and against their will. YOU WILL FIND THE AMOUNT OF BRITISH HATRED, INJUSTICE, TYRANNY & FASCISM, WHICH CAUSED THE PALESTINE ISSUE TO EMERGE AND YOU WILL FINALLY REALIZE THAT ISRAEL IS NOT A RESPECTFUL STATE, REFUTED BY ARABS MERELY BECAUSE OF BEING JEWISH. THE ARABS REFUTED THIS STATE, BECAUSE, IT WAS FORMED THROUGH TERRORISM & IT IS REALLY A BIG GANG OF ROBBERS WHO STOLE & SNATCHED AWAY THE PROPERTY, LAND, RIGHTS, ETC. OF THE PALESTINIANS.
Israel was made by terrorism & against the will of the people. It was forcefully pasted on the Palestinians. That’s why the Arabs didn’t want to accept it. You will also realize that Zionists are the most perverted form of tyrannts, traitors and imposters. Here is the last extract from Professor Arnold J. Toynbee’s writing, which is also cited in the book:
“All through those 30 years, Britain (admitted) into Palestine, year by year, a quota of Jewish immigrants that varied according to the strength of the respective pressures of the Arabs and Jews at the time. These immigrants could not have come in if they had not been shielded by a British chevaux-de-frise. If Palestine had remained under Ottoman Turkish rule, or if it had become an independent Arab state in 1918, Jewish immigrants would never have been admitted into Palestine in large enough numbers to enable them to overwhelm the Palestinian Arabs in this Arab people’s own country. The reason why the State of Israel exists today and why today 1,500,000 (1.5 million!) Palestinian Arabs are refugees is that, for 30 years, Jewish immigration was imposed on the Palestinian Arabs by British military power until the immigrants were sufficiently numerous and sufficiently well-armed to be able to find for themselves with tanks and planes of their own. The tragedy in Palestine is not just a local one; it is a tragedy for the world, because, it is an injustice that is a menace to the world’s peace.” (See footnote 147 of above book)

The Israelis are not unaware of these things; in fact, the first Israeli Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion, submitted to the status of Israel & the Arab opposition in these words:
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault?” [Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), p.121]

It is a grave mistake to believe that all Jews are supporters of Zionism. There have been many vocal critics as well as some who have, for reasons of fear and intimidation, not been as vocal. I will mention some of these courageous voices and my apologies to those I omit. Anti-Zionist writers such as John Sack, Alfred Lilienthal, Benjamin Freedman, Israel Shamir, Israel Shahack, Norman Finkelstein, Henry Makow, Ralph Schoenman, Lenni Brenner, Victor Ostrovsky, Henry Meyer and Jack Bernstein are only of few of this group. These man have dared to speak out and have, as a result, been forced to suffer vicious attacks from groups like the “Anti-Defamation League” (ADL.) Despite its appealing name, this group specializes in slander and defamation.
In 1914, Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Turkish Empire were locked in conflict against England, France and Russia. By 1916, however, the Germans, Austrian Turks appeared to have won the war. Germany made an offer to Britain to end the war. It was an offer that was favorable to Britain, and yet, the British and the international Zionists had different plans. Led by Chiam Weizmann, they used their influence to bring the United States into the war on Britain’s side. In exchange, the British would reward the Zionists by taking Palestine from the conquered Ottoman Empire. Once under British control, the Jews of Europe would be encouraged to immigrate to Palestine in huge numbers.

ISRAEL IS STANDING ON TERRORISM
Israel has been made through Terrorism and it was the greatest injustice done to the Palestinians, yet, the Arabs are the ones who are blamed for disrupting peace. I want to clear something right here: if you steal someone’s property, land, house, money, wealth, etc. and start living peacefully in there & on his items, then don’t expect that guy to simply sit out there and watch you, only because driving you out would “disrupt peace.” This is a stupid idea; the Police has to be called for to kick out that robber and punish him well, so that neither he nor someone else commits such a crime again. This is the status of Israel; Even the Zionists themselves knew that if the consent of the people of Palestine is taken into account, it may dump their mission before it even starts. Their injustice resulted in the emergence of Israel, but, Israel is still not peaceful!!!
Israel has continued its terrorism since its inception, uptil now. Let me provide here a few quotes:

“Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.” Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine, Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry.
“There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed.” [Golda Maier, Israeli Prime Minister, June 15, 1969]
“We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return” David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar’s Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p.157
David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, said to the General Staff: “We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai.” [From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978]
“We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.” Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.
“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.” Israel Koenig, “The Koenig Memorandum”
“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country (Israel) that did not have a former Arab population.” Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969.
“We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours.” Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983.
“We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?’ Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said ‘Drive them out!’” Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.
“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.” Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972
Rabin’s description of the conquest of Lydda, after the completion of Plan Dalet: “We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters.” Uri Lubrani, PM Ben-Gurion’s special adviser on Arab Affairs, 1960. [From “The Arabs in Israel” by Sabri Jiryas]
“There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary i.e. it is easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over those of a tenant. [I] tend to support the latter view and have an additional argument:...the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be Jewish...with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my diary.” Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency’s Colonization Department. From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5
“The Palestinians would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988.
“There is a huge gap between us and our enemies-- not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience. They are our neighbors here, but it seems as if at a distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do NOT belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy.” Israeli president Moshe Katsav, The Jerusalem Post, May 10, 2001.
“Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don’t grab will go to them.” Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998
“One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.” -- Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994 [Source: N.Y. Times, Feb. 28, 1994, p.1]
“We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will meet our demands and needs. We will forever destroy because we want a world of our own.” (You Gentiles, by Jewish Author Maurice Samuels, p.155)
“We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” (Jewish Banker Paul Warburg, February 17, 1950, as he testified before the U.S. Senate)
(An interesting one below...)
Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, on October 3, 2001, said to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio: “Every time we do something you (Shimon) tell me America will do this and will do that ... I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, CONTROL AMERICA, and the Americans know it.” (Certainly the FBI’s cover-up of the Israeli spy ring/phone tap scandal suggests this...)

I also want to clear up some more issues; remember one thing, the media portrays events & things as they want it. You see what your Govt. wants you to see and don’t see what they don’t want you to see. I will quote one or two examples shortly to prove this.
(a) The Jewish Hollow Broadcast, oh sorry, Holocaust is nothing more than a fairy tale. I have a very good & lengthy research report on this issue, but, it is in Urdu and time does not permit to translate it into English. Anywayz, there is a lot of information available on the net. For example, “What Ahmadinejad said about the Holocaust was in our bosoms,” the former German chancellor, Helmut Kohl, was quoted as saying. “For years we wanted to say this, but we did not have the courage to speak out.”[a] In Holocaust, 6 million Jews died out of the 2.4 million Jews living in Germany, inside a Gas Chamber which was constructed after the end of WW-II. Holocaust has been denied by many historians like Robert Faurisson, Francis Pekaryuki, Paul Rassinier, Haryy Elmer Barnes, James J. Martin, Prof. Arthur Butz, Pierre Guillaume etc. In 1979, Institute of Historical Review (IHR) was formed to do research on Holocaust. In 1987, Bradley Smith established a Committee for Open Debate On Holocaust (CODOH.)
[a]: http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6086
Some books which are useful for proving the falsity of Holocaust are:-
- Imperium by Francis Pekaryuki (1962)
- The Drama of European Jews by Paul Rassinier (1964)
- Holocaust Story and the Lies of Ulysses by Paul Rassinier
- The Hoax of Twentieth Century by Professor Arthur Butz
- Hitler’s War by David Erving
- Did Six Million Really Die? by Ernst Zindel

A good book entitled “Did Six Million Really Die” by Richard Harwood is available completely at the below link:
http://www.vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2004/03/122056.php
This link also contains an interesting research work. In this website, the original version of this book is compared with a version uploaded on a Jewish website. You will be amazed to see that the Jews have edited the text in many places for their ulterior motives! Yeah, watch out for the Zionists because they don’t hesitate to use every method to fulfill their desires!

It should be noted that the Iranian Presdient, Mehmood Ahmedinejad is not the first person to deny Holocaust; he did not say this in a merely emotional state of mind. Research on Holocaust began from the WW-II and people who denied Holocaust, also existed from that time. Francis Pekaryuki, the first person to deny Holocaust, was an Anglophile and an adherent of Carl Marx at young age, who later became a disciple of Oswald Spingler. He was not anti-Jewish or a Nazi disciple. Furthermore, I would like to bring into your notice that debating Holocaust is DECLARED IMPERMISSIBLE BY VARIOUS LAWS in many countries. These countries include France, Belgium, Austria, Slovekia, Lithuania, Czech Republic, Poland, Germany, Switzerland, Israel itself, etc. In Canada and Britian, there is no explicit law regarding Holocaust, but, under the law of hatred media/literature, a person raising doubts about Holocaust can also be punished.
In fact, the people whose books I have mentioned above, most of them were punished. The first one i.e. Francis Pekaryuki was the one who lost his life for only debating Holocaust. He had to face legal complications in many countries and his book was refused to be published. Any journalist who would try to promote his views will have to face these complications too. When his life became miserable, he emmigrated to Egypt to lead a peaceful life, but, for how long? Soon, the FBI arrested him and as it always happens, he was found “suspiciously” dead in his cell. Some cyanide capsules were found near his body, but, no one has ever been able to explain how these capsules reached him, within the FBI custody. Ernst Zindel was also punished for 15 months for writing that book. David Erving was punished for 3 years for writing that book and in fact, he felt so much oppression that he repented from his views!!! Haryy Barnes was the one who proved that Hitler did not want to fight America, but, it was President Roosevelt himself who wanted to plunge into WW-II, and only his treacheries made the incident of Pearl Harbour possible! Paul Rassinier, who also refuted Holocaust, had himself remained in the prison of Nazis. He was arrested in October 1943, because, he was involved in helping Jews to illegally cross borders and emigrate to other countries. He was kept in the concentration camp of Bouchen wald and was later transferred to Dora, where he remained imprisoned till the end of WW-II. After the end of the war, he came back to his native country France & became an MNA (Member of National Assembly.) He was awarded with the biggest Decoartion Award. Soon, he materialized & preserved his experiences of the concentration camps of Bouchen wald and Dora, in the form of books & other writings. But, today he is considered to be the Father of those who refute Holocaust! I ask you a simple question: WHY DID HE REFUTE HOLOCAUST? HE HIMSELF WAS IMPRISONED & HELPED JEWS TO CROSS BORDERS ILLEGALLY, THEN WHY? THE ANSWER IS: TO UNVEIL DECEPTION & PRESENT THE TRUTH! He had to face the punishment of death while in the custody of the F.B.I.
All this is because of the fact, as The Iranian President pointed out, that Holocaust has become a profitable industry and Holocaust is considered to be more sacred to the Jews (because of its immense benefits) than their own religion! “O Jewish Holocaust! Thou art holier than Jesus of Nazareth!” (Peace be upon him) The Israelis, on the 27th day of the Jewish month “Nisan”, after the Siren at 8:00 AM stop all their activites for 2 minutes. This is actually done in memory of the event which occured 19th April, 1943 in memory of Holocaust and this day is known among the Zionists as “Yom ha Sho’ah.” After a few weeks, they celebrate their Day of Independence on 14th May, 1948. The Jewish website, Holocaust Chronicle 2002 Publications Internatinoal Ltd. says that there is a strong link between Yom ha Sho’ah and The Day Of Independence, because, Holocaust is the foundation of Israel. Hmm... this means that if a bomb is detonated in the Holocaust, it would cause the Sky-scarper Tower of Israel to implode (“pull down”) upon its own footprints!
(It is indeed ironical that on one hand the West asks for absolute freedom of speech, freedom to publish defaming and blasphemous caricatures of a Prophet of God (P.B.U.H.) and on the other hand, they have made it illegal to raise doubts about Holocaust and also, they don’t allow researchers to see the documents prepared by the Red Cross regarding Holocaust. Only ten countries have the authority to view them, by submitting a special application, while the rest of the countries including Germany, don’t have the authority to even see these papers! Enough equality, double-standards & discrimination against Muslims!)
There are a lot of immense benefits of Holocaust and this may surprise the ignorant! According to the Washington Report on Current Affairs, Israel receives about $5 billion (USD) annually which means that every day, Israel receives about $13.5 million (USD) from the US. Dr. Stephen writes in his article “The Strategic Functions of US Aid to Israel” that one-third of the total loans forwarded to all countries of the world, goes back to Israel alone. AND OF COURSE, THE GREATEST BENEFIT OF HOLOCAUST WAS THAT THE ZIONISTS GOT A FOUNDATION UPON WHICH TO BUILD THE STATE OF ISRAEL AT THAT TIME!
I will end up this issue by telling you that the Jewish expert on Holocaust, Judah Bower (I don’t know the spellings) submitted on 12 November, 1989: “The incident of the ruthless killing of 4 million Jews in the Auschwitz Camp is a white lie.” [Auschwitz Revisionism: An Israeli Scholar’s Case, New York Times, issue of November 12, 1989]
(May be I will make up a full blown research report on Holocaust after my examinations...)

(b) Israeli General Matityahu Peled said in clear terms: “The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war.” [Ha’aretz, issue of 19 March, 1972]

US MEDIA SPREADING PROPAGANDA
I just give a few examples:-
(1) CNN showed Palestinians cheering the death and destruction of 11 September. The scenes were repeated throughout the day and around the world to sow hatred against the “callous” Palestinians.
Now it turns out that it used footage from 1991 and just claimed that it was today’s footage. A contributor to CounterPunch[1] (edited by Alexander Cockburn) reports that he and his colleagues had compared this tape with one from 1991 showing Palestinian cheering, and found them to be identical. Here are excerpts from that letter by Marcio A. V. Carvalho at State University of Campinas - Brazil:
“All around the world we are subjected to 3 or 4 huge news distributors, and one of them - as you well know - is CNN. Very well, I guess all of you have been seeing (just as I’ve been) images from this company. In particular, one set of images called my attencion: the Palestinians celebrating the bombing, out on the streets, eating some cake and making funny faces for the camera.
Well, THOSE IMAGES WERE SHOT BACK IN 1991! Those are images of Palestinians celebrating the invasion of Kuwait! It’s simply unacceptable that a super-power of communications as CNN uses images which do not correspond to the reality in talking about so serious an issue.
A teacher of mine, here in Brazil, has videotapes recorded in 1991, with the very same images; he’s been sending emails to CNN, Globo (the major TV network in Brazil) and newspapers, denouncing what I myself classify as a crime against the public opinion. If anyone of you has access to this kind of files, search for it. In the meanwhile, I’ll try to ‘put my hands’ on a copy of this tape.
But now, think for a moment about the impact of such images. Your people are hurt, emotionally fragile, and this kind of broadcast have very high possibility of causing waves of anger and rage against Palestinians. It’s simply irresponsible to show images such as those.”
[Marcio A. V. Carvalho State University of Campinas - Brazil]
Source: http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/film_palestine.shtml
[1]: http://www.counterpunch.org/carvalho.html

(2) Another example I am giving you is actually to show how the US media covers up the sins of the Israelis.
(Below is actually an article written by Khalid Baig.)
On 28 September 2000, extremist Israeli leader Ariel Sharon, accompanied by thousands of fully armed Israeli soldiers provided by the government of “moderate” Prime Minister Ehud Barak, invaded Al-Aqsa mosque. The Muslim house of worship --- the third holiest site in Islam --- was off limits to the worshippers while the Jewish terrorist and his army roamed there and trampled it under their boots. As the calculated provocation generated expected protests, Israeli shock troops and snipers trained their weapons on the unarmed protesters, killing, blinding, maiming and torturing --- the same way they have been doing ever since they set foot in Palestine. Actually this time they ratcheted up their level of brutality, using tanks, missiles, banned dum-dum bullets, and heavy weapons to silence the unarmed protests. They also provided escorts to armed Jewish lynch mobs as they rampaged through neighborhoods of unarmed Palestinians. In the first two weeks, they savagely killed more than 120, maimed thousands, and destroyed property on a large scale in efforts to terrorize them all and remind them that “Israel is powerful.”

(A) WHAT HAPPENED
VERY FIRST REPORT BY CNN
“(CNN) -- A visit by Likud Party leader Ariel Sharon to the site known as the Temple Mount by Jews sparked a clash on Thursday between stone-throwing Palestinians and Israeli troops, who fired tear gas and rubber bullets into the crowd.” [September 28, 2000 Web posted at: 9:28 a.m. EDT (1328 GMT)]

See how benign it is? Ariel Sharon is not the terrorist, extremist, and the mastermind of Sabra and Shatilla massacres that he is, he is just a respectable Israeli politician. And what did he do? He visited a site known as Temple Mount. Not Al-Aqsa, not the third holiest site in Islam, not Haram Ash-Shareef. Above all, he just visited. He did not take any army of thousand plus soldiers and entered a Muslim holy site. How can any reasonable person find fault with an Israeli leader visiting a Jewish holy site? To him the protesters would appear to be unfair or crazy.

COVERAGE by BBC
“Hundreds of people have been injured in the clashes, which began on Thursday after a visit by the right-wing Israeli politician Ariel Sharon to the holy site in Jerusalem which is revered by both Muslims and Jews.”

The above mentioned statement from BBC was the most generous of all. Al-Aqsa, is thus the place firmly established as a Jewish site or, at most, as a Jewish site contested by Muslims as well.
Is it that these multi-million dollar media establishments did not know the name Al-Aqsa or had no way of finding about it? If you believe that then you might also believe that the British leaders who were laying the foundation of this trouble in 1917 did not know that Muslims lived in Palestine (and in the King-Crane Commission Report, it was pointed out that 90% of the Palestinian population was against the concept of a Jewish Commonwealth or homeland.) For, that is how that infamous Balfour Declaration went: “His Majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine…”. While the reference to the civil and religious rights was just a window dressing, never meant to mean anything, it is important to note that even here they were careful not to name Muslims, who are mentioned anonymously as “non-Jewish populations.” At that time Muslims were 92% of the population of Palestine! Robbing their identity was the first step toward robbing their land. And robbing the identity and history of Al-Aqsa is the propaganda machine’s method of paving the way for converting it into Temple Mount!

This treatment also implies that the Muslim and Jewish claims are on equal footing. Little would their audiences realize that Al-Aqsa mosque has been there for the last fourteen centuries. Or that the Jewish claim, based on ancient history, is unprecedented in the history of land claims. For if the underlying principle is accepted, then, long before this claim is addressed, Americans will have to vacate all of their land and give it back to the children of local Indians from whom it was appropriated.
Further it is important to remember that the entire Haram complex is internationally recognized as an Islamic Waqf property. In 1930 during the Al-Buraq Wall (now commonly mentioned as the Wailing Wall) riots, the British mandate forces appointed a committee to investigate and decide the ownership of the wall. The committee carried out several investigations resulting in the Islamic identity of the Wall, which was considered as a part of the Islamic property “Awqaf,” including the pavement and Al Magharbeh area, as charitable possessions. It is this internationally recognized Islamic Waqf property and the third holiest site in Islam (that has been standing there for the past fourteen centuries), and not an obscure and controversial site that was violated by Sharon and Israeli troops. Sharon had desecrated Al-Aqsa, not visited Temple Mount!

(B) PREVIOUS WARNING
A crucial fact related to Sharon’s provocation was that it had been previously announced and that Palestinian leaders had warned about its consequences a day in advance. The Israeli government decided to ignore these warnings and provide the military escort for this adventure anyway. While this warning was mentioned by AP on 27 September, it was never referred to again. Why? Because if a person has been warned about the provocative nature of his act and he still carries it out, then it is obviously an intentional provocation. But that is not the truth that the media machine wanted to let out.

(C) FIGHTING
Equally clever was the depiction of the protests as “fighting.” This legitimized Israeli brutality, as in fighting people do get killed and wounded. Imagine what would have been the impact if the propaganda machine had referred to that over-publicized event as Tiananmen Square fighting. Why that was a massacre and this is fighting? Because the propaganda machine chooses its words very carefully!

The depiction of protest as fighting has another beneficial result: it allows presenting the barbarity and brutality as a sign of strength and bravery. In fact, at least one callous radio commentators in the US made fun of the poor fighting skills of the Palestinians.

This distortion was further reinforced through the repeated use of such terms as “cease-fire” and appeals to both parties to “end violence.”

One example of this myth of proportionality was a report in the LA Times (14 Oct 2000) that purported to be balanced, and objective. But it is a strange way of achieving balance: “As helicopters circle overhead and the two sides hurl rocks at each other on the ground, the veneer of civility is being stripped away.” The two sides hurling rocks at each other? Since when did the tear gas shells, the lethal steel bullets, the live ammunitions, and the missiles metamorphosize into rocks?

(D) LOOKING THE OTHER WAY
Propaganda consists in exaggerating some facts, distorting others, and hiding or minimizing still others. All of these techniques have been employed in this case. Israel’s use of banned dum-dum bullets was not mentioned. The lethal steel bullets, with a thin rubber coating, were mentioned as rubber bullets. The new savage practice of targeting the eyes of protesters, thereby blinding dozens of young people, was never reported. All hell would have broken loose if a fraction of these acts had been performed by the other side.

As Mobs of armed Jewish settlers rampaged through Palestinian homes, shouting “Death to Arabs” and looting, burning, killing, torturing, and lynching in the name of their God given rights, the media machine just looked the other way. There were more important things to report. Like the admonitions of Kofi Annan to Palestinians.

When, occasionally, and much later, these acts were mentioned, it was done as complaints from Palestinians (who the audiences had already been prepared not to trust) and not as reporter’s own observations. Of course, the use of a term like Jewish terrorism, would be clearly unthinkable. So would be features analyzing the hatred and animosity in the hearts of those who carried out such despicable acts in the name of God. So would be the reports depicting true nature of Zionist occupation and the virtual slavery into which the Palestinians are being forced in the name of peace.

(E) ISRAELI STATEMENTS
While reporters normally try to be intelligent creatures who ask questions and provide relevant contradictory information where appropriate, they also know their limits. The most ludicrous Israeli statements are always reproduced with a flat face, even with supporting statement whenever possible. Case in point: the disingenuous statement by Sharon that he meant no provocation was carried without the slightest suggestion that there was something blatantly wrong with it.

(F) INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY?
In the tons of reports and commentaries regarding this latest crisis, one item was conspicuously absent: references to the International Community. Search through 150 pages of news and commentary from major media outlets found only three occurrences of the phrase: an op-ed article on a BBC web site complaining about the failure of international community to provide an honest broker for the Middle East conflict, and two statements by Saudi Crown Prince and Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat asking the elusive “international community” to protect the Palestinians.

Contrast this with, say, East Timor, where the “international community” was in the news daily. It could not stand the bloodshed, it had to take action, and before you knew it did take action. Contrast this with the US-Iraq war of a decade ago in which every step was taken in the name of the “international community.” Contrast this with the Bosnian holocaust at the hands of the Serbians, where a handicapped international community was in the news everyday. It shed its tears, it felt very bad, it displayed its helplessness, and it continued to enforce an arms embargo that would ensure the slaughter of Bosnians, while deeply thinking of ways to help them!

Actually there is no contradiction here. The “international community” was simply performing its assigned role in each case. Of course there are many countries in the world and they follow their interests, but the entity referred as the “international community” above is solely a creation of the propaganda machine. The masters of the propaganda machine are also the masters of the “international community.” They use it when needed and discard it when that suits them. The fools, on the other hand think and act as if it is real. They are always seeking its pleasure and petitioning it for help.

In case of Israel, the “international community” did have a limited but essential role. It was used to legitimize its existence in 1948. That is when the UN affirmed the Balfour Declaration and through its partition plan granted 56% of the land of Palestine to Israel when the Jews owned only 5.7% of the land (meaning they were given about 10 times more property than they owed right to.) Who gave them the right to award land like this, no body has ever answered.

Since then the role of the UN has been simply to occasionally pass resolutions that may make some Palestinians feel good, without delivering anything. The latest Security Council resolution is an example. It was a vague, watered down, resolution, that aimed to deliver nothing. Yet, for whatever little it did say by deploring “excessive use of force,” (massacres are excessive use of force?) Israelis were quick to reject it without fear that they would be accused of defying the will of international community or thumbing their nose at it. “It happened that we survived the harsh language of the U.N. many times in the past,” said Avraham Burg, the speaker of the Israeli parliament. “If they want to continue with their rhetoric, it’s beautiful, it’s no problem, but at some point it will become irrelevant.”

We are living under the New World Order where might is right and the propaganda machine creates the truths and facts to serve the cause of that right. It is incessantly entertaining, but it is also deadly. The least we can do is to realize the nature of that machine and open our eyes.

Source: http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/aqsa.shtml

A FEW EVENTS WHICH REFLECT ZIONIST ETHICS
(a) According to Israeli sources, Jewish extremists have recently been desecrating two mosques in the Khadera area, writing graffiti on their outer walls reading, “Kahana was right, death to the Arabs.”
A third mosque, known as the Ein-Hud Mosque, was used by Jews, with government approval, as a bar and, using the words of a local Muslim official, a “place where vice is done.”
A few months ago, the noted Israeli journalist Amira Hass described the wanton rampage of Israeli soldiers in Ramallah in April.
She described what the soldiers did and left at the Palestinian ministry of culture.
“In every room of the various departments, literature, film, culture for children and youth books, discs, pamphlets and documents were piled up, soiled with urine and excrement,” said Hass in her report, published in Ha’aretz on 7 May.
“There are two toilets on every floor, but the soldiers urinated and defecated everywhere else in the building, in several rooms of which they had lived for about a month. They did their business on the floors, in emptied flowerpots, even in drawers they had pulled out of desks.”
“Someone even managed to defecate into a photocopier.”
And like the Nazis who usually leave the swastika sign on the walls or forefronts of vandalized synagogues, the Israeli soldiers then left their own corresponding symbols in Ramallah.
“Here and there was the candelabrum symbols of Israel, stars of David, praises for the Jerusalem Betar soccer team.”

Source: http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/jews_neonazis_defecate.shtml

(b) Dura: West Bank, 25 September, 2002 (IAP News)
In a brazen provocation to Muslim sensibilities, the Israeli army on Wednesday desecrated the Grand Mosque in Dura and placed the Israeli flag atop the mosque minaret.
Palestinian sources also reported that Israeli occupation soldiers urinated and defecated inside the Mosque after breaking into it Wednesday morning.
Palestinians expressed their profound indignation at the Israeli army conduct, calling it “disgusting and characteristic of Jewish disregard for anything non-Jewish.”
“The Jews experienced German Nazism, we are experiencing Jewish Nazism,” Hasan al Haroub said with bitterness apparent in the tone of his voice.
Since the beginning of the intifada, Israeli troops destroyed and desecrated scores of mosques and churches in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
However, the sacrilegious acts received little coverage in the West, particularly in the United States.

Source: http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/dura_mosque_desecration.shtml

ZIONISM IS NOBODY’S FRIEND / ZIONISTS CONTROL AMERICA
I want to emphasize here that the whole world fears to speak anything which may displease the Israelis. I quote here a few sayings & incidents:-
(i) “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.” [ US official quoted in Carl Cameron’s Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring; online at: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html ]
(ii) “Investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying ... is considered career suicide.” [ Carl Cameron, as quoted in “The Spies Who Came In From The Art Sale” online at: http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/2002-03-13/fishwrapper.html ]
(iii) “While I agree with you, if I say anything about US geopolitical interests with Israel, I might as well clean off my desk.” [ Unnamed reporter as quoted in “American Media Censorship and Israel” online at: http://www.ccmep.org/ccmep/american031902.html ]
(iv) Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, on October 3, 2001, said to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio: “Every time we do something you (Shimon) tell me America will do this and will do that ... I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, CONTROL AMERICA, and the Americans know it.”
(v) Author Jack Bernstein stated:
“I am well aware of the tactics YOU, my Zionist brethren, use to quiet anyone who attempts to expose any of your subversive acts. If the person is gentile, you cry “you’re anti-Semitic,” which is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide your actions. But if a Jew is the person doing the exposing, you resort to other tactics:
First, you ignore the charges, hoping the information will not be given widespread distribution. If the information starts reacting too many people, you ridicule the information and the person giving the information. If that doesn’t work, your next step is character assassination. If the author or speaker hasn’t been involved in sufficient scandal, you are adept at fabricating a scandal against the person or persons. If none of these are effective, you are known to resort to physical attacks. But NEVER do you try to prove the information wrong.” [The Life Of An American Jew in Racist-Marxist Israel, By Jack Bernstein, 1984]
(vi) In 1924, a scholarly Dutch Jew, Dr. Jacob Israel de Hahn, who functioned as a secretary of Rabbi Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld (1849 - 1932) Chief Rabbi of Palestine, was murdered as he returned from evening prayers outside Shaarui Zedek hospital in Jerusalem. His crime was that he had been involved in discussions with Arab leaders that offered an alternative to Zionist hegemony. His murderers were members of the Haganah, a Zionist, so-called “defense organization.” In fact, Dr. de Hahn may well be described as the first victim of Zionist violence in the Holy Land. Yet, outside of a limited circle of anti-Zionist Jews, this cowardly and cold blooded murder is completely unknown[1]. [Source: WRH Yahoo! Group, Files section]
[1]: http://nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/index.cfm
(vii) The Nuturei Karta is the name given to a group of Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem who refuse to recognize the existence or authority of the so-called “State of Israel.” In their literature they write:
“Zionist propagandists are always given to bullying tactics and censorship. It is very helpful in this regard to read former Congressman Findley’s book, They Dared to Speak Out. It is the sorry record of the immense resources that the Zionist lobby invested in destroying the careers of politicians all across the United States who had voiced some qualms about this nation’s subservience to Israel.”
[ Source: http://nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/index.cfm ]

(Below is actually an article posted by Judy Andreas, a Jew, in the Files section of WRH Yahoo! Group; if you are a member of this group, you can read the file. It is named “Zionism is Nobody’s Friend.htm” If you want to verify this, you can send a mail to: JUDE10901@AOL.com )

Our history books are replete with blank pages. There is a virtual media blackout on some of the most prescient occurrences that have led to the untenable situation in today’s world.
In the late 1800’s, the Zionists schemed to take over Arab Palestine. Most people are not aware that the Jews had not controlled Palestine since the days of the Roman Empire and that the small group of Arab Jews who lived in Palestine got along well with their Muslim hosts and never expressed any desire to overthrow the Ottoman rulers and set up a nation called Israel. This movement came strictly from influential European Zionists.
In 1914, Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Turkish Empire were locked in conflict against England, France and Russia. By 1916, however, the Germans, Austrian Turks appeared to have won the war. Germany made an offer to Britain to end the war. It was an offer that was favorable to Britain, and yet, the British and the international Zionists had different plans. Led by Chiam Weizmann, they used their influence to bring the United States into the war on Britain’s side. In exchange, the British would reward the Zionists by taking Palestine from the conquered Ottoman Empire. Once under British control, the Jews of Europe would be encouraged to immigrate to Palestine in huge numbers.
Zionists such as Bernard Baruch, Louis Brandeis, Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff and others influenced President Woodrow Wilson, a man whose closet contained a few skeletons that he preferred to keep hidden. The press transformed the German Kaiser and his people into bloodthirsty “Huns”. In Germany, the Zionists used their power and influence to undermine Germany from within. The result was that the German, Austrian and Ottoman Empires were defeated and their maps were rewritten by the powers at the Treaty of Versailles in 1918.
The Balfour Declaration, which gave the land of Palestine to the Jews, was issued in 1917, one year before Germany surrendered. (The Jewish Virtual Library of the American-Israeli co-operative enterprise.)
For the readers who have dismissed what I have written so far, I ask you to turn your attention to the work of Benjamin Freedman. Freedman was an American millionaire who severed ties with his fellow Zionists years after the war. He went on to dedicate much of his life and fortune, from the Woodbury Soap Company, to exposing the truth about both World Wars and the Zionist grip on America. This is easily verified. Do not let knee jerk reactions close your mind. I know how distressing this is. Growing up Jewish, I have ‘walked that walk.’ I have felt the sorrow and disbelief. It is important, however, that we begin to write some real history on those blank pages in your school syllabus.
The Balfour Declaration was a letter prepared in March 1916 and issued in November of 1917 by the British statesman Arthur James Balfour, the foreign secretary which expressed the British government’s approval of Zionism and “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”
As a result, Israel was established as an independent state in 1948 in the mandated area.
The German people resented the Zionist role in bringing about their WW 1 defeat as well as the incredibly harsh Treaty of Versailles with its brutal monetary reparations. The German economy was in ruins. The people elected Adolf Hitler in 1932 and the Nazi party soon seized control of the German media, banks and universities away from the influential Zionists who had controlled them.
Zionists called for action against Germany and boycotts were imposed in the UK and USA. On March 24, 1933, “The Daily Express” of England carried the following headline; “Judea Declares War on Germany. Jews of All the World Unite in Action” ( Daily Express (England) March 24, 1933.)
In September of 1939, Germany and Poland went to war over disputed territory that had been taken away from Germany by the Versailles Treaty of 1918. Great Britain and France saw an opportunity to declare war on Germany under the pretext of protecting Poland. They conveniently ignored the fact that Stalin’s Soviet Union had invaded Poland too. Germany pleaded with Britain and France (the Allies) to withdraw their war declarations, but the Allies continued their massive military buildup along Germany’s frontiers. Germany’s neighbors (Belgium, Holland and also Norway) succumbed to Allied political pressure to allow their armies to establish bases in their territories. In the spring of 1940, the war in Western Europe began when Germany launched preemptive invasions of Norway, Holland and Belgium. In the United States, the Zionists applied pressure to Franklin Delano Roosevelt to involve the United States in the war.
The rest is history, if you’ll pardon the poor pun. The United States’ entry into the war resulted in another crushing defeat for Germany.
A few years after the end of the second World War, the plan to establish the nation of Israel in Palestine materialized. Great Britain, left weakened, were chased from Palestine by Zionist acts of terror. The most notorious terror group was the Irgun, led by Menachem Begin. Later on, Begin would go on to become the Prime Minister of Israel and the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. It kind of leaves you scratching your head, doesn’t it?
July 22, 1946, Irgun terrorists, dressed as Arabs, entered the Kind David Hotel in Jerusalem. They unloaded 225 kilograms of explosives. The Secretariat of the Government of Palestine and the Headquarters of the British Forces in Palestine were housed there. Most of the victims were British but 15 innocent Jews also died. The radical Zionists had no trouble killing their fellow Jews in their attempt to advance their mission.
The Irgun terror gang also targeted Arab civilians in order to frighten them into leaving their homes and villages. The massacre at Deir Yassin, April 9, 1948, was one such occurrence.
Christian Arabs numbering over 254 were dragged from their homes, lined up and shot. Many were old men, women and children.
By 1948, the UN, UK and US had recognized the nation of Israel. One of its first acts was to pass “the law of return”, which gave any Jew in the world the right to move to Israel and become a citizen. The land had been stolen from the Arabs in a brutal fashion and the brutality has not stopped.
In the years that have followed, many “false flag” operations have occurred:
1. In 1955, Israeli agents, impersonating Arab terrorists were caught staging a series of bombings against US installations in Egypt. The scandal came to be known as the Lavon affair.
2. In 1967, during a war with the Arabs, Israeli gunboats and fighter jets attacked the USS Liberty, an unarmed US ship. Thirty five American sailors were murdered and 170 were injured. Their excuse was that they mistook the ship for an Egyptian one. However, survivors of the incident have contradicted this. [www.ussliberty.org]
3. In the 1980’s, the Israelis once again succeeded in framing enemy Arabs in order to anger the United States. Former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky de

(Continued from previous...)
3. In the 1980’s, the Israelis once again succeeded in framing enemy Arabs in order to anger the United States. Former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky defected from the Mossad and tried to warn the United States about their evil, murderous nature. He told how the Israelis framed Libya for the bombing of a German night club which framed Libya and caused President Reagan to bomb Libya in 1986, killing the 4 year old daughter of Libyan leader Muamar Qadhafi. Ostrovsky’s 1990 book, By Way of Deception revealed how the Mossad recruits Arab agents to carry out their missions. He also stated “Israeli agents are skilled at impersonating Arabs.”
It is imperative to emphasize that Zionism is nobody’s friend. It is imperative that Jewish people realize that they too have been betrayed by the Zionists who have continued using Judaism to hide behind. In fact, when all the details are carefully examined and carefully considered, the painful reality is that IT WAS ZIONISM WHICH LITERALLY SENT EUROPE’S JEWS INTO THE BOWELS OF THE HOLOCAUST.’
A veil of disbelief shrouds many Jewish eyes. This is because the sordid history of Zionism has been so effectively suppressed. The plethora of Holocaust movies and cries of anti-Semitism have left Jewish people with fear and trembling. How many of these people are aware that the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis?
1. According to Lenni Brenner’s book Zionism in the Age of Dictators (Ch.7), the Zionist party was the only other political party in Nazi Germany that enjoyed a measure of freedom, and could publish a newspaper. The reason: Zionists and Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews go to Palestine.
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/ch07.htm
2. “If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Israel, then I opt for the second alternative.” David Ben Gurion informed a meeting of Labor Zionists in Great Britain in 1938 (Brenner, Zionism, p.149)
3. In November 1942, Rabbi Michael Dov-Ber Weismandel, a Jewish activist in Slovakia approached Adolph Eichmann’s representative, Dieter Wisliceny: “How much money would be needed for all the European Jews to be saved?” Wisliceny went to Berlin and returned with an answer.

For a mere $2 million they could have all the Jews in Western Europe and the Balkans. Weismandel sent a courier to the World Zionist Organization in Switzerland. His request was refused. The official, Nathan Schwalb sent enough money to save only Weismandel and his cadre. He wrote:
“About the cries coming from your country, we should know that all the Allied nations are spilling much of their blood, and if we do not sacrifice any blood, by what right shall we merit coming before the bargaining table when they divide nations and lands at the war’s end? ....for only with blood shall we get the land.” (Brenner, Zionism, p.237)
“Why would the Zionist leaders betray the Jews of Europe?” You wonder. After all, the entire rationale for the state of Israel has been that it was intended to be a refuge for Jews facing persecution.
The Zionists, to the contrary, saw any effort to rescue Europe’s Jews not as the fulfillment of their political purpose but as a threat to their entire movement. If Europe’s Jews were saved, they would wish to go elsewhere and the rescue operation would have nothing to do with the Zionist project of conquering Palestine. Their obsession with colonizing Palestine and overwhelming the Arabs led the Zionist movement to oppose any rescue of the Jews facing death, because the ability to deflect select manpower to Palestine would be impeded.
From 1933 to 1935, the World Zionist Organization turned down two-thirds of all the German Jews who applied for immigration certificates. As late as 1943, while countless Jews in Europe were dying, the U.S. Congress proposed to set up a commission to “study” the problem. Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was the principal American spokesperson for Zionism, came to Washington to testify against the rescue bill because it would divert attention from the colonization of Palestine.
One would have, perhaps, expected the Zionists to understand the meaning of humiliation and the pain of being perpetual refugees. And yet, in place of compassion, the Zionists celebrated the persecution of others, even as they first betrayed the Jews and then degraded them. They selected a victim people of their own on whom to inflict a conquering design. They aligned the surviving Jews with a new genocide against the Palestinian people, cloaking themselves, with savage irony, in the collective shroud of the Holocaust.
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/ch06.htm
In 1951, the director general of the Israeli Health Ministry, Dr. Chaim Sheba flew to America and returned with 7 x-ray machines, supplied to him by the American army.
They were to be used in a mass atomic experiment with an entire generation of Sephardi youths to be used as guinea pigs. Every Sephardi child was to be given 35,000 times the maximum dose of x-rays through his head. For doing so, the American government paid the Israeli government 300,000 Israeli liras a year. The entire Health budget was 60,000 liras. The money paid by the Americans is equivalent to billions of dollars today.
To fool the parents of the victims, the children were taken away on “school trips” and their parents were later told the x-rays were a treatment for the scourge of scalpal ringworm. 6,000 of the children died shortly after their doses were given, the many of the rest developed cancers that killed them over time and are still killing them now. While living, the victims suffered from disorders such as epilepsy, amnesia, Alzheimer’s disease, chronic headaches and psychosis.
Yes, that is the subject of the documentary in cold terms. It is another matter to see the victims on the screen. ie. To watch the Moroccan lady describe what getting 35,000 times the dose of allowable x-rays in her head feels like.
“I screamed make the headache go away. Make the headache go away. Make the headache go away. But it never went away.”
To watch the bearded man walk hunched down the street.
“I’m in my fifties and everyone thinks I’m in my seventies. I have to stoop when I walk so I won’t fall over. They took my youth away with those x-rays.”
To watch the old lady who administered the doses to thousands of children.
“They brought them in lines. First their heads were shaved and smeared in burning gel.
Then a ball was put between their legs and the children were ordered not to drop it, so they wouldn’t move. The children weren’t protected over the rest of their bodies. There were no lead vests for them. I was told I was doing good by helping to remove ringworm. If I knew what dangers the children were facing, I would never have cooperated. Never!”
Because the whole body was exposed to the rays, the genetic makeup of the children was often altered, affecting the next generation. We watch the woman with the distorted face explain, “All three of my children have the same cancers my family suffered. Are you going to tell me that’s a coincidence?”
Everyone notices that Sephardi women in their fifties today, often have sparse patchy hair, which they try to cover with henna. Most of us assumed it was just a characteristic of Sephardi women. We watch the woman on the screen wearing a baseball-style hat. She places a picture of a lovely young teenager with flowing black hair opposite the lens. “That was me before my treatment. Now look at me.” She removes her hat. Even the red henna can’t cover the horrifying scarred bald spots.
The majority of the victims were Moroccan because they were the most numerous of the Sephardi immigrants. The generation that was poisoned became the country’s perpetual poor and criminal class. It didn’t make sense. The Moroccans who fled to France became prosperous and highly educated. The common explanation was that France got the rich, thus smart ones. The real explanation is that every French Moroccan child didn’t have his brain cells fried with gamma rays.
The film made it perfectly plain that this operation was no accident. The dangers of x-rays had been known for over forty years. We read the official guidelines for x-ray treatment in 1952. [ http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2182 ]
Have you had enough? I have. I am tired of the manipulation. I am tired of watching people fighting; people who should be banding together in a common cause. I am tired of watching Jews and Gentiles being used for the nefarious gains of an extremely dark force. I am tired of watching the targeting and extermination of Muslims. I am tired of watching our rights disappear while the populace falls asleep in front of their televisions. I am tired of hate and dissension. I am tired of helplessness and hopelessness and an immobilized populace. I am tired of watching people throw their hands up in despair.
There are lone voices crying in the wilderness. Are these voices falling upon deaf ears? I urge every person of conscience to speak out. Don’t be afraid. We are the many and they are the few. Add your voice to this group until the hushed whispers become a deafening roar.
Are you doubting what I say? Don’t take my word, do your own investigation. It’s a painful exploration but I truly believe that the balance of this planet hangs on the opening of Jewish eyes. There are many good hearted Jewish people who are being duped along with their Gentile brethren. Much of the world is waking up to the manipulations of the few and it is imperative that Jewish people join them. There is no time to waste. The information is limitless. There is no refuge for Jewish people in Israel. My dear readers, Zionism will not protect you. Zionism will crucify you on a bloody cross of avarice. It is only through a union of Jewish, Christians and Muslims that we will we be able to take back our planet.

Judy Andreas
mailto:JUDE10901@AOL.com

(NOTE AGAIN THAT JUDY ANDREAS, A JEW, HAS WRITTEN ALL THIS!!!!!!!)

ISRAEL’S NUCLEAR ARSENAL
Below is the information found regarding the History of Israel’s Nuclear Program at the Nuclear Weapons Archives website.

Source: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Israel/Isrhist.html

“Israel’s involvement with nuclear technology literally extends back to the founding of the country in 1948. A host of talented scientists emigrated to Palestine during the thirties and forties, particularly one Ernst David Bergmann - later the director of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and the founder of Israel’s efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The Weizmann Institute of Science actively supported nuclear research by 1949, with Bergmann heading its chemistry division. Also in 1949, Francis Perrin - French nuclear physicist, atomic energy commissioner, and personal friend of Bergmann’s - visited the Weizmann Institute, after which Israeli scientists were invited to the newly established French nuclear research facility at Saclay. A joint research effort was subsequently set up between the two nations.
At this time France’s nuclear research capability was quite limited. France had been a leading research center in nuclear physics before the war, but had fallen far behind developments in the US, the USSR, Britain, and even Canada. Israel and France were thus at a similar levels of expertise at the time, and it was possible for Israeli scientists to make valuable contributions. Consequently the development of nuclear science and technology in France and Israel remained closely linked in the early fifties, for example Israeli scientists were involved in the construction of the G-1 plutonium production reactor and UP1 reprocessing plant at Marcoule.
In the 1950s and early 1960s, France and Israel had very close relations. France was Israel’s principal arms supplier, and as instability spread in France’s colonies in North Africa, Israel provided valuable intelligence obtained from its contacts with sephardic Jews in those countries. The two nations even collaborated (along with Britain) in planning and staging the joint Suez-Sinai operation against Egypt in October 1956. The Suez Crisis, as it became known, proved to be the genesis of Israel’s nuclear weapons production program.
Six weeks before the operation Israel felt the time was right to approach France for assistance in building a nuclear reactor. Canada had set a precedent a year earlier when it had agreed to build the 40 MW CIRUS reactor in India. Shimon Peres, a key aide to Prime Minister (and Defense Minister) David Ben Gurion, and Bergmann met with members of the CEA (France’s Atomic Energy Commission). An initial understanding to provide a research reactor appears to have been reached during September.
On the whole the Suez operation, launched on 29 October was a disaster. Although Israel’s part of the operation was a stunning success, allowing it to occupy the entire Sinai peninsula by 4 November, the French and British invasion on 6 November was a failure. The attempt to advance along the Suez canal bogged down and then collapsed under fierce US and Soviet pressure. Both European nations pulled out, leaving Israel to face the pressure from the two superpowers alone. Soviet premier Bulganin issued an implicit threat of nuclear attack if Israel did not withdraw from the Sinai.
On 7 November 1956, a secret meeting was held between foreign minister Golda Meir, Peres, and French foreign and defense ministers Mssrs. Christian Pineau and Maurice Bourges-Manoury. The French officials were deeply chagrined by France’s failure to support its ally in the operation, and the Israelis were very concerned about the Soviet threat. In this meeting the initial understanding about a research reactor may have been substantially modified, and Peres seems to have secured an agreement to assist Israel in developing a nuclear deterrent.
After some further months of negotiation, the initial agreement for assistance took the form of an 18 MW (thermal) research reactor of the EL-3 type, along with plutonium separation technology. At some point this was officially upgraded to 24 MW, but the actual specifications issued to engineers provided for core cooling ducts sufficient for up to three times this power level, along with a plutonium plant of similar capacity. How this upgrade came about remains unknown.
The reactor was secretly built underground at Dimona, in the Negev desert of southern Israel near Beersheba. Hundreds of French engineers and technicians filled Beersheba which, although it was the biggest town in the Negev, was still a small town. Many of the same contractors who built Marcoule were involved, for example the plutonium separation plants in both France and Israel were built by SGN. The Ground was broken for the EL-102 reactor (as it was known to France) in early 1958. The heavy water for the reactor was purchased from Norway, which sold 20 tons to Israel in 1959 allegedly for use in an experimental power reactor Norway insisted on the right to inspect the heavy water for peaceful use for 32 years, but was permitted to do so only once, in April 1961, prior to it being loaded into the Dimona reactor tank.
Israel used a variety of subterfuges to explain away the activity at Dimona - calling it a “manganese plant” among other things (although apparently not a “textile plant” as most accounts claim). US intelligence became aware of the project before the end of 1958, took picture of the project from U-2 spy planes, and identified the site as a probable reactor complex. The concentration of Frenchmen was certainly impossible to hide.
In 1960, before the reactor was operating, France, now under the leadership of de Gaulle, reconsidered the deal and decided to suspend the project. After several months of negotiation, an agreement was reached in November that allowed the reactor to proceed if Israel promised not the make weapons and announced the project to the world, work on the plutonium plant halted.
On 2 December 1960, before Israel could make the announcement, the US State Department issued a determination that Israel had a secret nuclear installation. By 16 December this became public knowledge with its appearance in the New York Times. On 21 December Ben Gurion announced that Israel was building a 24 MW reactor “for peaceful purposes.”
Over the next year the relationship between the US and Israel was strained over the issue. The US accepted Israel’s claims at face value in public, but exerted pressure privately. Although Israel did allow a cursory inspection by physicists Eugene Wigner and I.I. Rabi, PM Ben Gurion consistently refused to allow international inspections. The final resolution was a commitment from Israel to use the facility for peaceful purposes, and an agreement to admit a US inspection team once a year. These inspections, begun in 1962 and continued until 1969, were only shown the above-ground part of the buildings, which continued down many levels underground. The above ground areas had simulated control rooms, and access to the underground areas was kept bricked up while the inspectors where present. The most favorable interpretation that can be given to adherence to the pledge is that it has apparently been interpreted by Israel to mean that nuclear weapon development is not excluded if the are used strictly for defensive, and not aggressive purposes. It should be remembered though that Israel’s security position in the late fifties and early sixties when the nuclear program was taking shape was far more precarious than it subsequently became after the Six Day War, the establishment of a robust domestic arms industry, and a reliable defense supply line from the US. During the fifties and early sixties a number of attempts by Israel to obtain security guarantees from the US, thus effectively placing Israel under the US nuclear umbrella in a manner similar to NATO or Japan, were rebuffed. If an active policy to restrain Israel’s proliferation had been undertaken, along with a secure defense agreement, the development of a nuclear arsenal might have been preventable.
In 1962 the Dimona reactor went critical, and the French resumed work on the plutonium plant, believed to have been completed in 1964 or 1965. The acquisition of this reactor and related technologies was clearly intended for military purposes from the outset (not “dual use”) as the reactor has no other function. The security at Dimona (officially the Negev Nuclear Research Center) is stringent, an IAF Mirage was actually shot down in 1967 for straying into Dimona’s airspace. There is little doubt then, that some time in the late sixties Israel became the sixth nation to manufacture nuclear weapons.
According to Seymour Hersh, PM Levi Eshkol delayed starting nuclear weapons production even after the Dimona facility was finished. The reactor remained in operation so the plutonium continued to collect, whether it was separated or not. It is generally believed that the first extraction of plutonium occurred in 1965, and that enough plutonium was on hand for one weapon during the Six Day War in 1967 although whether a prototype weapon actually existed or not is unknown. Hersh relates that Moshe Dayan gave the go ahead for starting weapon production in early 1968, which is when the plutonium separation plant presumably went into full operation. After this Israel began producing three to five bombs a year. William Burroms and Robert Windrem, on the other hand, assert in Critical Mass that Israel actually had two bombs available for use in 1967, and that Eshkol actually ordered them armed in Israel’s first nuclear alert during the Six Day War.
Israel began purchasing Krytrons in 1971. These are ultra high speed electronic switching tubes that are “dual use”, having both industrial and nuclear weapons applications.
At 2 p.m. (local) on 6 October 1973 Egypt and Syria attacked Israel in a coordinated surprise attack, starting the Yom Kippur War. Caught with only their standing forces on duty, and these at a low level of readiness, the Israeli front lines were overrun. By early afternoon on 7 October no defensive forces were left in the southern Golan Heights and Syrian forces had reached the edge of the plateau, within sight of the Jordan River. It has been widely reported that this crisis brought Israel to its first nuclear alert. Hersh reports that the decision was made by PM Golda Meir and her “kitchen cabinet” on the night of 8 October. This resulted in the Jericho missiles at Hirbat Zachariah and the nuclear strike F-4s at Tel Nof being armed and prepared for action against Syrian and Egyptian targets. US Sec. of State Henry Kissinger was apparently notified of this alert several hours later on the morning of 9 October, which helped motivate a US decision to promptly open a resupply pipeline to Israel (Israeli aircraft began picking up supplies that day, the first US flights arrived on 14 October.)
Though stockpile depletion remained a concern, the military situation stabilized on October 8 and 9 as Israeli reserves poured into the battle and disaster was averted. Well before significant resupply had reached Israeli forces, the Israelis counterattacked and turned the tide on both fronts. On 11 October a counterattack on the Golan broke the back of Syria’s offensive, and on October 15 and 16 Israel launched a surprise crossing of the Suez Canal. Soon the Egyptian Third Army was faced with encirclement and annihilation, with no protective forces remaining between the Israeli Army and Cairo. This prompted Leonid Brezhnev to threaten, on 24 October, to airlift Soviet troops to reinforce the Egyptians. Pres. Nixon’s response was to bring the US to world-wide nuclear alert the next day, whereupon Israel went to nuclear alert a second time. This sudden crisis quickly faded as PM Meir agreed to a ceasefire, relieving the pressure on the Egyptians.
Considerable nuclear collaboration between Israel and South Africa seems to have developed around 1967 and continued through the 70s and 80s. During this period SA was Israel’s primary supplier of uranium for Dimona. An open question remains regarding what role Israel had (if any) in the 22 September 1979 nuclear explosion in the south Indian Ocean which is widely believed to be a SA-Israel joint test.
Hersh relates extensive (and highly successful) efforts by Israel to obtain targeting data from US intelligence. Much satellite imaging data of the Soviet Union was obtained through the American spy Jonathan Pollard, apparently indicating Israel’s intention to use its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent, political lever, or retaliatory capability against the Soviet Union itself.
Satellite imagery from a US KH-11 satellite for example was used to plan the 7 June 1981 attack on the Tammuz-1 reactor at Osiraq, Iraq. This attack, carried out by 8 F-16s accompanied by 6 F-15s punched a hole in the concrete reactor dome before the reactor began operation (and just days before an Israeli election) and delivered 15 delay-fuzed 2000 lb bombs deep into the reactor structure (the 16th bomb hit a nearby hall). The blasts shredded the reactor and blew out the dome foundations, causing it to collapse on the rubble. This was the world’s first attack on a nuclear reactor.
Since 19 September 1988 Israel has had its own satellite reconnaissance system and thus no longer needs to rely on US sources. On that day the Offeq-1 satellite was launched on the Shavit booster, a system closely related to the Jericho-2 missile. Offeq-2 went up on 3 April 1990. The launch of the Offeq-3 failed on its first attempton 15 September 1994, but was retried successfully 05 April 1995.
Both Hersh and Burrows and Windrem agree that Israel went on full scale nuclear alert again on the first day of Desert Storm, 18 January 1991, when 7 Scud missiles were fired against the cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa by Iraq (only 2 actually hit Tel Aviv and 1 hit Haifa.) This alert apparently lasted for the duration of the war (43 days.) Threats of retaliation by the Shamir government if the Iraqis used chemical warheads are interpreted to mean that Israel intended to launch a nuclear strike.”

As you may have guessed, I will use these facts in a moment when I answer off the third argument of yours. It is noteworthy here that there was a risk of nuclear strike by Israel, no less than 3 times:
(i) In 1967, Eshkol ordered nukes to be armed in Israel’s first nuclear alert during the Six Day War.
(ii) On 7 Oct. 1973, on the decision of PM Golda Meir, Israeli F-4s prepared for a nuclear strike, as well as Jericho missiles, against Egyptian and Syrian targets and they might have been used if the war did not end within a short period.
(iii) On 18 Jan. 1991, Israel again armed nukes and the Shamir Govt. threatened to use it against the Iraqis.

ACCEPTING ISRAEL
I tried my best to explain to you why Israel cannot be accepted. Accepting Israel would be the greatest triumph of terrorism & tyranny and the greatest failure of the just side. It would be the greatest injustice and would be like adding salt to the bleeding wounds of the Palestinians. Israel is unacceptable and accepting Israel, as the 1st PM David Ben Gurion himself submits, is completely wrong and unjust.
In case you forgot what the 1st PM of Israel said, here is the quote again:
The 1st Israeli PM, David Ben Gurion said: “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault?” [Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), p.121]
So, Iran by not accepting Israel is working on the advice of the Israeli PM himself! However, I would like to point out here that not accepting Israel does not mean that you completely destroy it or “wipe it off the map.” I would like to point out here that the respectful Iranian president, Mehmood Ahmedinejad has not offered this as an only solution. In fact, in his speech of 2 Sept. 2005, he also proposed to shift Israel to Austria or Germany. Many other proposals can be presented in this regard, but, accepting Israel is completely unjust & unjustifiable.

Recently, some Muslim countries have reluctantly shown interest in accepting Israel, but, this has been done only due to one reason. Their argument is that thousands and thousands of Palestianians have died, without any progress towards the solution of the problem and therefore, we have to change opinion, because, not doing so will only result in more lives.
This argument is contraversial and can be debated, but, note again that even in this argument, Israel is not being considered a respectful nation/state. It is only a submission and prostration to the huge terrorist capabilites of a peace-threatening nation and a frank admission of the helplessness and weakness of those who have been oppressed by the Israelis.

Now, coming to your third & last argument:-
>>>(1) Iran managed to hide its nuclear program for close to 20 years.
WHAT? ARE YOU SURE YOU SPELLED THIS CORRECTLY? ARE YOU SURE THIS IS WHAT YOU MEANT? ARE YOU SURE THIS IS AN ARGUMENT? THIS IS TRASH!
“Nobody has the right to punish Iran for enrichment. We have not seen nuclear material diverted to a nuclear weapon…”
This is what Mohammed ElBaradei, chief of IAEA, told Reuters on 30 March 2006.
Source: http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=11701885

So, the fact that Iran hid its peaceful nuclear program for close to 20 years, does not give anyone the right to punish Iran. [I am skeptic whether Iran hid it for 20 years or not] And in fact, this argument can go from my side! Iran had to hide its Nuclear Programme, coz today when the US/EU know about it, they are getting mad over it & they want to deprive Iran of its “inalienable rights” to enrich Uranium.
Recently, I heard reports saying that an order is being drafted which would impose sanctions on Iran, as well as give US the right to strike Iran. IF THIS HAPPENS, THIS IS WILL BE THE GREATEST, I REPEAT, GREATEST INJUSTICE EVER DONE BY THE WEST TO THE MUSLIMS! AND AFTER THIS STRIKE, US WILL BE THE GREATEST TERRORIST ON EARTH, DEPRIVING EVEN HUMAN EQUALITY WITH THE MUSLIMS. THE FACT WILL BE PROVED THAT MUSLIMS ARE NOT CONSIDERED HUMANS, BUT, A CREATION LOWER THAN ANY OTHER CREED OF THIS WORLD!

Anyways, read the history of Nuclear Technology of all countries at this website:
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/
Take the example of India; Canada and US provided them Nuclear Technology for peaceful purposes only. Proliferation was not permissible, albeit no proper arrangements for investigation were made. India soon used the technology to build up its atomic bomb.
Source: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/India/IndiaOrigin.html

So, what do ya say: take Uncle Sharon as pilot and Uncle Bush as co-pilot and rock all India with B-61 deterrents dropped from B-2 bomber planes?! Come on! Give me a break!

Also, go and look at the history of Israel; Israel managed to hide its nuclear reactor for 10 years, not because it was underground, but, by calling the Dimona reactor to be a “manganese” plant or other things. It was only in 1958 that a U-2 US spy plane managed to recognize it as a Nuclear Reactor. Furthermore, Israel’s nuclear program from beginning day was to obtain nukes and two nukes were ready in 1967, but, even today Israel has not accepted that it possess nukes! Infact, they managed to hide PREPARED NUCLEAR BOMBS for 21 years! (So, shouldn’t the US strike Israel with B-61 nukes dropped from B-2 bombers?)
It was only in 1987 that the information regarding Israeli nukes came to light, thanks to Mordechai Vananu. Vananu worked as a technician at the Machon 2 facility, where plutonium is produced and bomb components fabricated, for 9 years. He was dismissed in 1986 for taking part in Pro-palestinian politics and before leaving, he managed to take about 60 photographs, covering almost every part of Machon 2, due to lax internal security. He converted to Christianity in Australia. The religious group he associated with has an activist anti-nuclear bent and he soon decided to make public his knowledge of Israel’s nuclear weapons capability. He made contact with the London Sunday Times which flew him to London and began preparing an exclusive news story. Unfortunately for Vanunu, the Israeli government had found out about his activities and the Mossad arranged to kidnap him and bring him back to Israel for trial.
He was successfully lured into a trap by a female Israeli agent named Cheryl Bentov operating under the name of “Cindy.” His sudden disappearance before the publication of the Sunday Times story was mysterious at the time. The story was finally published after several days. A few months later Vanunu’s status as a prisoner of the Israeli government was confirmed when it was revealed that he would stand trial. Despite being essentially incommunicado, Vanunu managed to reveal details of his capture in dramatic fashion when he wrote the information on the palm of his hand, and held it up for news photographers as he was being whisked away from the courthouse.
Vanunu claimed that Israel possessed 100-200 nuclear weapons (implying some 400-800 kg of plutonium) and can produce 40 kg of plutonium a year. Vanunu also claimed that Israel possessed fusion boosted weapons and has developed HYDROGEN BOMB technology.
Source: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Israel/index.html

What has Iran done? They don’t have a bomb, nor have they violated the NPT and if they try to make a bomb, it will require a time of about 10 years. If Iran is to be struck by B-61 nukes, Israel & India have more right to be struck, not with B-61 nukes, but, with H-bombs!!!
The Zionists undoubtedly control American Govt. and they are stabbing it hard in the back, to force Iran to give up its nuclear program. In Iraq’s case, Israeli fighter planes themselves dumped the reactor dome; fortunately, in Iran’s case, this is not so easy. Wow! It seems amazing when I find that the US/EU are threatening a country of nuclear strikes, if it does not give up its “inalienable rights” and yet, the UN is sleeping, thinking only about pressurizing the already oppressed country!

And in fact, the argument that Iran hid its Nuclear Programme can go from my side! Yeah, I can turn the tables back unto you! Iran had to hide its Nuclear Programme, coz today when the international community knows about it, despite it being peaceful, Iran is receiving threats of nuclear strikes! How unjust it is to say this!
Furthermore, no nation has been punished uptil now, if it developed nuclear weapons by violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty. In fact, almost all nations obtained deterrents this way! And I think, Iran should make a nuke; after all, Israel is a terrorist which has not only been left free by the International community, but, is also being supported by it! This nuclear weapon will then serve as a warning signal to this terrorist which has been committing crimes at random!
I would also like to present here the views of Mufti Taqi Usmani, an eminent Pakistani scholar & head of Islamic Department of O.I.C., on the issue of proliferation:

“The haves want to keep what they have and stop others from having it. If others have it, that will be ‘proliferation.’ The power to destroy must stay with the powerful, because, powerful is responsibile. But, was it? (He is referring to the use of untested deterrents on Hiroshima & Nagasaki, by the US, which killed hundreds of thousands of innocent children, women, men, patients, disabled, talented ones, old ones, etc.) So, being powerful, or mutually cooperating powerfuls, is no guarantee that nuclear weapons will not be used. Human beings of one country sitting on their nukes and talking about world peace is hardly believable ...
A word about the use of the word, ‘deterrent’ with nuclear weapons. They are there, just in case ... They are supposed not to be used first. They are for retaliation. The having of nuclear weapons means that everybody should behave or else! So, they are ‘deterrents,’ telling people to be careful and not mess around. So human beings can have deterrents to check the irresponsible behaviour of others, the behaviour of ‘rogue’ states, for example.” [Ma’ariful Qur’an by Mufti Muhammad Shafi, English Edition, Vol.3, p.158, footnote 1 by Editor-- Mufti Taqi Usmani]

When the mountainous misconceptions about Islam & Muslims are removed, and the real history of Israel comes into light, it becomes crystal-clear who is right & who is wrong! It also shows how responsible the international community is ... To me, there is nothing wrong in Iran making a nuclear bomb, which will take 10 years if it even decides to do so. My argument is that a terrorist state like Israel, having not only nuclear but also H-Bombs, is a severe threat to Muslim countries. Israel has tried its best to gain more and more nuclear technology, while at the same time, itself taken or induced others to take such actions which ensure that the neighbouring Muslim states don’t get this technology and as a result, Muslim countries always stay one level lower than Israel.
“Israel is believed to possess the largest and most sophisticated arsenal outside of the five declared nuclear powers. Israel has never admitted possessing nuclear weapons, but abundant information is available showing that the capability exists.”
Source: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Israel/index.html
So, this means that Israel has not revealed in public, its nuclear program for developing weapons, for close to 40 years!!!

Finally, you also wrote:
>>>Muslims just can’t be trusted anywhere!
After my voluminous explanation, I don’t think there is any reason to believe that Muslims can’t be trusted anywhere. In fact, Muslims are trusted at almost all places, but, the US & other Zionist media are striving hard to develop Islamophobia. Their main reason before was to portray that the “state” of Israel is “legal”, “justifiable”, “just”, “respectful”, etc. (all within commas) but it is the Arab countries who are against it, only due to their hatred for Jews & their doctrine of Jihad. (God forbid! Mahz ALLAH!)
Now-a-days, Islamophobia is spread widely in a disciplined manner, probably after 9/11, to throw the blame on the Muslims when their is almost no evidence and to hide up the real terrorists. 9/11 done by the Zionists, Bush, his rogue networks, etc. paved the path for subsequent invasions of Muslim countries and to ensure the safety of Israel. Furthermore, an audio tape prepared, NOT by the Osama who died in Dec. 2002, but from someone inside the Pentagon, says that the motive of the war in Iraq is to make a larger Israel. For more details, see this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wrh/message/4288

I would also like to emphasize here that you guys have absolutely no problem with the Zionists; you can trust them, even though there is a law known as “The Talmudic Law of the Moser” or “The Law of the Jewish Informer.”

“Citizen of the United States of America Stephen M. St. John notes that the Talmudic Law of the Moser, or the Law of the Jewish Informer, is essentially a covenant prohibiting a Jew from informing on another Jew to a non-Jew, which is diametrically opposed to the adversarial process of our own legal system and therefore conducive toward obstruction of justice.”
Source: http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4wbps/id11.html

An example of the application of this law was by the Israeli airports, from which the ill-willed flights took off, on 9/11. For details on this issue, see the below link:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ICTS.html
For more such articles, see this link:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israel_9-11_index.html

On the contrary, the Qur’an tells its followers to obey this injunction:
“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well­Acquainted with what you do.” [al-Maida 5:8]
“O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even though it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor, Allah is a Better Protector to both (than you.) So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you may avoid justice, and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well­Acquainted with what you do.” [5:135]
So, will you still not trust the Muslims? Or do you want to ignore specific parts of the Muslim Holy scripture and misinterpret some other specific parts, according to your own desires, for fulfilling your mission of cleansing the world of Muslims!

Furthermore, I already provided the below link to Richard Hardwood’s book before.
http://www.vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2004/03/122056.php
In this link, the researchers have downloaded a copy of this book from a Jewish website and compared it with an original copy. They found that many places have been changed! Read the above link; the original & modified text has been colored blue & red respectively.
At many places, the whole meaning has been distorted! For example, in the beginning of Chapter 2, the Jews have replaced the original words “September 5, 1939” with their new words “September 5, 1959” lolz... The Zionists do this quite frequently, but, yet you can trust them everywhere!

Dr. Anis Shorrosh made a book “Al-Furqan Al-Haqq” which was supposed to be an “alternate” Qur’an and an answer to the challenge of the Qur’an. While it utterly failed and allowed the Muslims to turn the tables back unto them & provoke them, yet these people did not hesitate to give “pseudo-reviews” at Amazon bookstore, regarding their book, with stereotypical Muslim names. As I have been personally involved in a research on this book, I found out that it has abused & insulted the Muslims, Islam, Qur’an, etc. nearly about 4,107 (YES! I REPEAT: FOUR THOUSAND, ONE HUDRED AND SEVEN) TIMES!!! Let me clarify one thing; I previously mentioned the figure 1400 times somewhere else, but, after checking my reports, I found it to be incorrect and the real figure is 4,107 times!
After this much insult of Islam, no Muslim can endorse this book, yet, on the Amazon bookstore, some Muslims with stereotypical Muslim names like Al-Qaradawi, Abdul Kebab, etc. Kebab means a piece of beef and thus Abdul Kebab means a servant of a piece of beef! Lolz... who idiot can name his child in such a way? Easy to guess: false review. Similarly, other Muslims were fabricated for praising their book and interestingly, these reviewers have only reviewed the devil book and a few books related with the Qur’an and always said exactly the same thing i.e. TTF is very good. They never gave reviews on anything else or never gave any other review; thus it is clear that they were fabricated by these Israelis for their ulterior motives!

I must point out here that I have always tried, NOT to criticize someone’s religious injunctions, but, sometimes I have to do it for explaining certain things. I am sorry if my above discussion has hurt the feelings of any Jew... really sorry for that!

Anyways, if I found time in the up coming days, which is almost impossible during the examinations, I will try to deliver a detailed post regarding 9/11.

Okay... I think I have said enough to satisfy you; I invested my energies, as time permitted, to as much extent as I could. I hope this post will have removed at least some doubts and the immense hatred for Islam & Muslims from your heart. I don’t mean that you necessarily accept Islam & become a Muslim, but, at least you deem Islam to be a peaceful & respectful religion and Muslims to be reliable/trustworthy and respectful humans!

“Wa akhir-ud-da’wah na anil hamdulillah-ir-rabb-il-a’alameen”

Thank you,
Abdul Rehman.

"Truth has come and Falsehood has vanished. Surely! Falsehood is ever bound to vanish." [Isra 17:81]