| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald recalls an apposite quote by A. Carlebach and its use by the deceased and egregious Christian dhimmi and Islamic apologist Edward Said:
The relentless Jihad against Israel -- against, rather, any Infidel sovereign state within the Dar al-Islam -- always included imposition of the Shari'a as part of its intended goal. Imposition of the Shari'a was, in fact, demanded as early as 1920 by a group of Arab notables in the former Ottoman territories that were quite properly assigned to Mandatory Palestine (i.e. all of Western Palestine, while Eastern Palestine went to form part of the Emirate of Transjordan).Nor was there any doubt that the attempt to keep Jews out of the area was a Jihad directed at Infidels throughout the Mandatory period; curiously, it was some British officers, rather than the Palestinian Jews, who recognized the Islamic grounds for opposition to the Jews and the restoration of a Jewish Commonwealth. It is also true that a few Israelis, early in the history of the state, had the wit to recognize the problem. One of these was Dr. A. Carlebach, whose analysis published in Ma'ariv (Oct. 7, 1955) would have been lost to history, one suspects, but for the fact that it is reprinted, amusingly and quite uncomprehendingly, in Edward Said's preposterous "The Question of Palestine."
Fortunately for us, Said often provided quotes from various European and Zionist sources that are so deadly, so convincing, particularly in the light of all we have learned about Islam over the past few years, that as works of propaganda they no longer serve their purpose. Here is what Said quoted from Carlebach, and what Said obviously thought it was self-evidently absurd, but we read it now with quite a different frame of mind:These Arab Islamic countries do not suffer from poverty, or disease, or illiteracy, or exploitation; they only suffer from the worst of all plagues: Islam. Wherever Islamic psychology rules, there is the inevitable rule of despotism and criminal aggression. The danger lies in Islamic psychology, which cannot integrate itself into the world of efficiency and progress, that lives in a world of illusion, perturbed by attacks of inferiority complexes and megalomania, lost in dreams of the holy sword. The danger stems from the totalitarian conception of the world, the passion for murder deeply rooted in their blood, from the lack of logic, the easily inflamed brains, the boasting, and above all: the blasphemous disregard for all that is sacred to the civilized world...their reactions -- to anything -- have nothing to do with good sense. They are all emotion, unbalanced, instantaneous, senseless. It is always the lunatic that speaks from their throat. You can talk 'business' with everyone, and even with the devil. But not with Allah...This is what every grain in this country shouts. There were many great cultures here, and invaders of all kinds. All of them -- even the Crusaders -- left signs of culture and blossoming. But on the path of Islam, even the tries have died.We pile sin upon crime when we distort the picture and reduce the discussion to a conflict of border between Israel and her neighbors. First of all, it is not the truth. The heart of the conflict is not the question of the borders; it is the question of Muslim psychology.....Moreover, to present the problem as a conflict between two similar parts is to provide the Arabs with the weapon of a claim that is not theirs. If the discussion with them is truly a political one, then it can be seen from both sides. Then we appear as those who came to a country that was entirely Arab, and we conquered and implanted ourselves as an alien body among them, and we loaded them with refugees and constitute a military danger for them, etc. etc. ...one can justify this or that side--and such a presentation, sophisticated and political, of the problem is understandable for European minds--at our expense. The Arabs raise claims that make sense to the Western understanding of simple legal dispute But in reality, who knows better than us that such is not the source of their hostile stand? All those political and social concepts are never theirs. Occupation by force of arms, in their own eyes, in the eyes of Islam, is not all associated with injustice. To the contrary, it constitutes a certificate and demonstration of authentic ownership. The sorrow for the refugees, for the expropriated borders, has no room in their thinking Allah expelled, Allah will care. Never has a Muslim politician been moved by such things (unless, indeed, the catastrophe endangered his personal status). If there were no refugees and no conquest, they would oppose us just the same.
Now when Said put this into his little work of propaganda back in 1979, the invented "Palestinian people" and their "legitimate rights" were in full swing. In 1979, the front of dhimmis, those islamochristians such as Hanan Ashrawi, were already in evidence -- on campuses, before church groups, disguising the nature of the Jihad against Israel which cannot be assuaged, cannot be sated, and is not a matter of borders.
But something has changed: other Muslim attacks, in America, in Russia, in Europe, and other Muslim cries against Infidels, and other Muslim behavior, including the demand that European peoples yield to Muslim demands, have caused many, and should cause many more, to read the words written above with a new understanding and a new appreciation.
Hoist by his own petard was Edward Said -- he bothered to quote just a bit too much. Nowadays we do not scorn those he assumed we would scorn, but see the truth of their remarks, and the scorn of the good and intelligent reader is reserved for Said's own text. Quite something.
Posted by Robert at May 25, 2006 10:49 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Robert,
"But something has changed: other Muslim attacks, in America, in Russia, in Europe, and other Muslim cries against Infidels, and other Muslim behavior, including the demand that European peoples yield to Muslim demands, have caused many, and should cause many more, to read the words written above with a new understanding and a new appreciation. "
The above article with is paragrah quote honestly speaks volumes on the realities of the war the non-Muslim world is involved in at present.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 25, 2006 11:06 AM
I just read a book by Robert Irwin: "Lust for Knowing: The Orientalists and Their Enemies"
What a wonderful trashing of Edward Said's ignorant book 'Orientalism'. In a nutshell, Westerners from the middle ages till now have done far more to preserve the study of Islamic history, culture, religion and language than Muslims themselves.
Probably the greatest and most brilliant center of Islamic study in the world (history, culture, Arabic language etc.) is in...Israel.
Yes, Israel.
Said's cult book blithely dismisses all the impassioned study of these scholars as 'Cultural Imperialism'. The scandal is that Said's ignorance of Islamic history is breathtaking. On every page of his 'now sacred pc text' there are howlers and even in new editions he never deigned to correct anything.
Said is a 'Palestinian refugee' who in '48 held dual Egyptian and American passports and who's family was in Jerusalem for a few months where they had relatives, for quality medical care (probably Jewish medical care) they couldn't get in Cairo. They were quite wealthy.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at May 25, 2006 11:19 AM
OT:
Dear Hugh:
I know you often read the comments associated with articles you write. Consequently, I am writing this brief note to you in the hopes of bringing some interesting information to your attention.
Many of us wonder why Western nations aren't carrying out a successful propaganda campaign against political islam. The battle for "hearts and minds" is critical as we Jihadwatchers know. Those of us who do not understand Arabic could miss some of these efforts, being unable to listen to Al-Hurriyah for instance.
And yet, serious efforts are being made, officially and unofficially, largely under cover, i.e. the MSM will never report on itself.
In that regard, I would like to bring to your attention the efforts of Elena Benador, of Benador Associates:
http://www.benadorassociates.com/
Take a look at the list of intellectuals that this self-described "private club" represents:
http://www.benadorassociates.com/members.php
Elena Benador, by herself, is having a huge impact on the media, and no one, really, is aware of it or comments on it.
Finally, look at this Forum, the Arabic Broadcast Forum, that Benador Associates is helping to organize. After looking at this forum, I am beginning to feel a glimmer of hope that efforts are being made to change "hearts and minds". The biggest problem is that Western governments cannot be seen to be financially supporting such efforts; consequently, these efforts must be made by private thinktanks, etc.. The Saudis, etc. do not have to deal with such ethical qualms and buy influence, fund university seats, etc. with no worry that their efforts will be criticized or even noticed by the MSM. It is strange that Western governments cannot spend money directly to tout Western values as our media would consider this Orwellian and intrusive. Yet, when our enemies spend money directly to tout their values, they get a free pass. The media is definitely part of the problem. Maybe this Arabic Broadcast Forum will help.
http://www.abfonline.net/home/home.htm
Look at the agenda and who is attending:
As of May 22nd, 2006 – agenda subject to change
Sunday, 4th June 2006
0930: Welcome
0935: In Conversation With: Zalmay Khalilzad, US Ambassador to Iraq and Hoshyar Zebari, Foreign Minister, Iraq
Moderator: Najwa Qassem, journalist, Al Arabiya
1005: Embedded in Danger: Iraq War Coverage
As war rages in Iraq and the conflict has proven to be the most dangerous war ever for journalists, ABF looks at how Iraqi journalists-cameramen are providing almost all of the coverage of the war. All international broadcasters, including all the Arab broadcasters, are now relying on locals to get the pictures and soundbites. How are journalists staying alive in Iraq? How do sectarian concerns affect the quality of journalism? If Iraq has now descended into a civil war, how much more difficult will it be to report the story? And if a conflict develops in Iran, what lessons can be learnt from the Iraq experience?
Featured Speakers:
Dr. Saad Al-Bazzaz, Al-Sharqiya TV
Khaled Al-Ramahi, senior producer Iraq, Syria & Jordan, Reuters TV
Hisham Bidawi, former Baghdad bureau chief, Al Arabiya
Tim Marshall, Senior Diplomatic Editor, Sky News
Aidan White, General Secretary, IFJ, Belgium
Moderator: Najwa Qasem, journalist, Al Arabiya
Produced by Al Arabiya
1130: Coffee
1155: New Technology, New Media and Citizen Journalism
Dramatic changes in technology are affecting how broadcast news organisations gather and deliver the news. How are all of these developments affecting the Arab broadcast journalism world? Although internet use is lower in the Arab world than in the West, its growth rate remains exponential. Blogging is becoming huge and now SMS via mobile phones also moves information and stories through the media and to consumers. Both blogging and SMS sparked much of the Danish cartoon controversy. So where is all this going? How are mainstream Arab media going to exploit these new changes? How will newly empowered Arab citizens take part?
Featured Speakers:
Dr. Amaar Bakkar, head of new media, MBC Group
Mohamed Gohar, general manager, Video Cairo Sat
Fares Abdel Raziq, Manager, Forum Sahat; Khaldoon Tabaza, president, Online Services
Sahar Talaat, researcher/journalist, University of Complutense of Madrid
Moderator: Hosam El Sokkari, Head of Arabic Service, BBC World Service
Produced by BBC World Service
1325: Lunch
1500: Technological Minaret: Islam and Media
This session looks at how sophisticated and media savvy Islamicists, especially the Islamic “evangelists”, are capturing new audiences by reaching them through everything from reality television programs to online material. Also some potent new Islamic satellite channels are getting a committed following and making inroads into the traditional audiences of established Arab broadcasters.
Featured Speakers:
Abdulrahim Ali, researcher, Islamic groups, Egypt
Dr. Hamad Al Majid, journalist/writer, KSA
Fayez Al Shehri, researcher in Islamists use of new media technology, KSA
Mohammad Al Awadhi, Islamic scholar, Kuwait; Paul Eedle, director, Out There News, UK
Paul Eedle, director, Out There News, UK
Moderator: Emad El Din Adeeb, Chairman and CEO, Good News Group, Egypt
Produced by Al Arabiya
1700: End of Day One
Monday, 5th June 2006
0930: Arab Perceptions of the West: Survey & Discussion
A landmark study to be revealed at Arab Broadcast Forum, this survey will mirror the November 2005 study about Western Perceptions of Islam presented at News Xchange.
Featured Speaker:
Chris Yalonis, president, Communique Partners
Moderator: Nakhle El-Hage, head of news, Al Arabiya
Produced by Arab Broadcast Forum
1030: Women & Arab Media
How are women faring in Arab-run news organisations? They seem to have hit a glass ceiling. Why are the most prominent women on Arab television channels from Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan and none or few from the Gulf states? Women make up the fastest growing part of the Arab workforce, but is that reflected by gains made by women in the newsroom? How is the coverage of women’s issues shaped by these realities?
Featured Speakers:
Sheikha Lubna al-Qasimi, economic minister, UAE
Hashwa Al Ruwaini, talk show host and executive, Dubai TV
Dania Balbisi, Washington correspondent Al Arabiya
Mona Makram Ebeid, professor of political science & political sociology, American University of Cairo
Dana Suyyagh, director of news & current affairs, ATV
Moderator: Gisele Khoury, presenter, Al Arabiya
Produced by Arab Broadcast Forum
1145: Coffee
1210: Lost in Translation: The Battle for Arab Viewers
A session that looks at the battle for Arabic Viewers! Not only are there more and more channels being created from within the region, new players from outside the Arab world are trying to gain a foothold in the region, including the United States (Alhurra), Germany (Deutsche Welle’s greater emphasis on Arabic programming) as well as the new BBC Arabic channel, Russia Today and Telesur, Al Alam (Iranian Arabic channel). And the soon-to-be-launched Al Jazeera International is the first example of an Arab channel broadcasting to the rest of the world.
Why are the foreign broadcasters so interested in reaching Arab viewers? Who is watching what? How do foreign broadcasters tackle sensitive topics such as the recent Danish cartoons, suicide bombers, and taboo political issues? What impact will these networks have: to create more conflict or more understanding? The forgotten audience – young viewers! How are Arab broadcasters reaching out to them? Or are they? And what about alternative programming – reality TV /Talk shows/Cooking show/Star Academy/Drama programming reaching out to the viewers – what impact are they having?
Featured Speakers:
Steve Clark, head of news, Al Jazeera International
Elie Harb, editor in chief, LBCSat
Moufac Harb, executive vice president, Alhurra
Akram Khuzam, head of Arab service, Russia Today
Christoph Lanz, managing director, Deutsche Welle
Christoph Lanz, managing director, Deutsche Welle
Gerard Saint Paul, head of news,CFII
Fran Unsworth, head of newsgathering, BBC News
Hesham Yousef, The Arab League
Moderator: Nart Bouran, head of news, Abu Dhabi TV
Produced by Abu Dhabi TV
1340: Lunch
1500: Thinking Global/Reporting Local
How the Arab broadcasters stay focussed on pan-Arab and international coverage as a way of avoiding the difficult issues that speak to their financing and political controls. Do they avoid hard core urban issues that could put them in conflict with their owners, both state and private? Who is breaking the mould? Which broadcasters are uncovering corruption and pushing the boundaries of aggressive reporting? How do you reach the youth?
Featured Speakers:
Bassim Abu Samaya, director general, Palestinian Radio & TV
Abir Awad, project manager, BBC Trust & Basra TV
Tariq Ayntrazi, general manager, Future TV
Faysal El Araichi, head, SNRT Morocco TV
Samira Kawar, Senior Producer, Middle East Report, Reuters TV
Abdellatif Minawi, head of news, ERTU - Egypt TV
Moderator: Jaber Obeid, Presenter, Abu Dhabi TV
Produced by Abu Dhabi TV
1700: Close
at May 25, 2006 11:37 AM
"The lunch sounds promising."
LOL!
You have a great sense of humour, Hugh. And that is another reason for optimism for our side. Two of the greatest thinkers in the Western canon, Ben Franklin and David Hume, knew that you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.
If only we could get people laughing at Islam, that would be a great accomplishment.
Posted by: Mentat at May 25, 2006 12:46 PM
A brother at heart with Said: I've emailed the following story hot of Bob Novack's press; I urge all JW followers to write to Novac and ask him, as I have, where is his outrage at the Islamic treatment of Christians? He only holds this disdain for the Jews. Read it and weep! The Zogbys and Novacks of the world should be called on their lies. Their writings should be answered.
Will Bush help Israeli Christians?
May 25, 2006
BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST
Rep. Henry Hyde, showing the courage that has typified a political career now in its final months, is pleading the case of endangered Palestinian Christians to President Bush. A faithful supporter of Israel over many years, Hyde said in a letter sent Friday to the White House: ''I cannot be blind when Israeli actions seem to go beyond the realm of legitimate security concerns and have negative consequences on communities and lands under their occupation.'' He urged the president to take up this issue with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on his Washington visit this week.
Hyde, chairman of the House International Relations Committee, sent along with his letter a five-page, single-spaced report prepared by his staff based on visits to Israel and Palestine over the past two years. It contends ''the Christian community is being crushed in the mill of the bitter Israeli-Palestinian conflict.'' The Israeli security wall and expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank, the report continues, ''are irreversibly damaging the dwindling Christian community.''
This issue was not on the agenda of the Bush-Olmert talks. There is no sign that Bush studied the House report or even that it made its way through an unsympathetic National Security Council staff into his hands. But Hyde's concern is shared by important members of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the new papal nuncio in Washington, represented the Vatican in Jerusalem the past eight years and realizes the plight of Christians there. So does Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the retiring archbishop of Washington, D.C., who recently went to the Holy Land to experience conditions there firsthand.
Hyde has been trying to get the Bush administration's -- and the world's -- attention since 2004, when he wrote Secretary of State Colin Powell expressing concern about Israeli policy. In 2005, Hyde took up the issue personally with Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres. At age 82, in his 32nd and last year in Congress, he is making what may be his final effort to get the president interested in what happens to less than 2 percent of Israel's population.
Since his letter to Powell two years ago, Hyde wrote Bush last Friday, ''the situation has significantly worsened.'' While backing Israel's ''need to defend itself,'' he called it ''important that United States support for Israel not be perceived as involving the affirmation of injustice.''
Hyde's committee report employs stronger language than the congressman had used previously. It calls for insistence that Israel ''honor its pledge to stop settlement expansion'' and suggests the security barrier is ''a pretext for annexing territory.''
The report rejects the widespread impression that the Olmert regime really is abandoning the West Bank and disbanding the settlements. The report says ''the Bethlehem area is home to over 20 Israeli settlements and there are plans to build more. The settlements in the barrier completely encircle the Christian triangle of Bethlehem, Beit Jala and Beit Sahour (Shepherds' Field).''
Furthermore, the report contends that ''fundamentalist'' settlers in East Jerusalem ''intend to establish their own brand of Jewish exclusivity'' and have ''Messianic aspirations on the Temple Mount.'' That ''undermines'' the stability of Jerusalem as a future shared capital of Israel and Palestine, which is described as ''vital'' to U.S. interests in a two-state Israeli-Palestinian solution.
Even as the new Israeli prime minister arrived in Washington, his government was taking unilateral steps affecting Palestine. On Sunday, it was announced in Israel that the Defense Ministry had approved expansion of four settlements in the West Bank. On Tuesday, the Israeli Supreme Court approved a security wall route running between Beit Arieh, Ofarim and the village of Aboud, an early center of Christianity.
''It would be helpful,'' says the Hyde report, ''if the United States Government committed itself to working with the Israeli government to end support for and prevent the establishment of new realities on the ground, which complicate a negotiated solution over Jerusalem, destroy its multicultural identity and constitute an increase in the political volatility of the city.'' But will George W. Bush be that helpful?
Posted by: biorabbi at May 25, 2006 1:11 PM
Carlebach's lucid assessment of Muslim psychology would fall easily into that category of "hate speech" that seems to be acquiring more and more legal weight these days, particularly in Europe.
Posted by: Television at May 25, 2006 1:16 PM
biorabbi
Being pro GOP, I rarely hate Republicans, but Novak is that rare specimen who I do loathe. While at CNN, he'd support just about every Islamic force there was - he was regularly pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel. In fact, when Hilary Clinton first spoke out in support of a Palestinian state, Novak was the only "Republican" who agreed with her. Pat Buchanan fell into that category as well, although happily, he is no longer Republican. In fact, on CNN Crossfire, Novak, Sununu and Buchanan were the regular Israel baiters, while linguini livered Liberals like Bill Press, Geraldine Ferraro and Bob Bechel were pro-Israel. Everything there was topsy turvy.
And when India and Pakistan went nuclear in 1998, guess which country Novak chose to pile on? It wasn't Pakistan.
Although I don't watch CNN, I am glad they fired him, and disappointed that FoxNews had to hire this geezer, when they have so many other normal Republicans in their cast.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 25, 2006 1:46 PM
As for Henry Hyde, the windbag who once opposed term limits on Congress by equating Congressmen to heart surgeons, what better could one expect? What is it about IL Republicans - Hyde, Hastert, George Ryan,... That state doesn't seem to have produced a good leader since Rumsfeld.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 25, 2006 1:51 PM
Why bother communicating with Novak? It's a waste of time. He is an obvious case of an obvious problem.
As for Hyde, or rather his staff, they must really be crazy if they think the problem of the Arab Christians is to be laid at Israel's doorstep. They have obviously been taken in, hook, line and sinker, by the every-diminishing group of those islamochristians who either identify with Islam out of ethnic solidarity, or have so internalized the attitudes required of them to survive in a Muslim sea, including the parroting of anti-Israel views, that they fail to realize that their survival depends on Israel's withstanding the Jihad. If Israel goes, the Christian presence in the Holy Land goes -- the situation as obtained before, in the 19th century, would not be possible. All over the Muslim countries the Christians have been under steady and ever more ferocious assault -- Maronites, Copts, Assyrians. Everywhere. And everywhere the numbers of Arabic-speaking Christians, able to survive under Islam, diminishes.
Does Hyde know this? Who is on his staff? Who are they, and what "experts" have they been listening to, or being taken in by, or perhaps in cahoots with, among the "Palestinian" islmochristians whose views are being so idiotically parroted by Henry Hyde?
Any visitors here who are constituents of Hyde feel like turning him into, as far as may be possible, Dr. Jekyll?
Posted by: Hugh at May 25, 2006 2:00 PM
Biorabbi,
Here is a link to the Wikipedia article on Robert Novak:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Novak
Scroll down to the section on "Religious and Political Views" and read the quote from Michael Kinsley about Novak. It is a classic. There is some other unflattering material in the article, including Novak's sometime nickname of "No Facts." I should say that I take Wikipedia material with a grain of salt. However, I liked this item on Novak.
Posted by: Howard, Fine & Howard at May 25, 2006 2:47 PM
Novak is Jewish but he converted to Catholicism about 6 years ago or something. It was quite recent. Novak is a common Czech surname as well, it's not just Jewish. He is clearly a self-hater and while not all paleocons think like him on the matter of Israel (Paul Gottfried and John Derbyshire come to mind), he pretty much takes the same position as Pat Buchanan on Israel. And I think you know what that means. He'll find any justification to bash Israel and excuse the Palestinians for their primitive behaviour (very odd coming from a paleocon since most of them do not support the Third World).
Someone mentioned Bill Press. He is NOT pro-Israel. He is pretty much on the same wavelength as Jimmy Carter on the matter of Israel.
There is no reaching these people. Trying to convince them that Israel is not the little Satan won't work. If you want to hoist them by the own petard (much like Hugh did with Said), ask them how long are they willing to support the Palestinians with welfare and ask them what do the Palestinians have to show for the millions they've received from America. They are huge critics of aid to Israel, but Israel atleast has some military technology to show for it and a booming IT economy. What have the Palestinians done and how long should we support them?
Concern for the Palestinian Christians doesn't move me anymore. They don't have it that bad and their current situation is a result of siding with their murderous Arab "brethren" instead of the Israelis. If they are truly worried about the rights of Christians, they should protest the treatment Christians receive in Egypt, Sudan, Pakistan, Indonesia, and China. Protesting the oppression of Christians in "Palestine" is like protesting the oppression of Poles in France. It shouldn't even be on the radar screen.
Posted by: igor at May 25, 2006 4:34 PM
Said, a Christian?! WTF?! Was he crazy, then?
Posted by: george_rem at May 25, 2006 5:08 PM
Any visitors here who are constituents of Hyde feel like turning him into, as far as may be possible, Dr. Jekyll?
I'm in Hyde's district. He is retiring this year. As an "open" seat it will hotly contested in November.
Posted by: Malta_1565 at May 25, 2006 5:18 PM
Retiring? To do what? He's not going to be working for some Arab or Muslim or "Palestinian" front group, is he?
Posted by: Hugh at May 25, 2006 5:26 PM
Hyde is 82 years old so he maybe actually retiring to retire.
Posted by: Malta_1565 at May 25, 2006 5:32 PM
Carlebach for President!
(Even if we have to exhume him.)
Said can stay dead.
Posted by: profitsbeard at May 25, 2006 6:00 PM
Hugh, maybe your right. Maybe I'm pissing in the wind by contacting the Zogby's and Novack's of the world. I can't resist. If someone enter's the public square with garbage, I'll call him on it.
I've been banned by the Huffington Post but a key post of mine 'made it through the anti-biorabbi firewall.' I disclosed the remations of Zogby to the Saudis with facts, and I discussed the history of Marionite Christian persacution at the hands of Islam in Lebanon. After my post, four or five people expressed thanks to me on their blog, and I was banned. There were 15 or 16 comments on Zogby's last spew, and most centered on his ties with Saudi. He didn't appreciate it.
Is this pissing in the wind? Why not call people on their ties? Pro or Con. Is somebody a member of AIPAC? Is that relevent on their appearing on FOX News or CNN? As a strong supporter of Israel, I'd be the first to recognize it is relevent . . . where somebody's bread is buttered . . . how their children's tuition is paid for.
I might add I have ties to the Chicago Sun Times. Major ties on both sides of my family . . . some in cushy jobs that, in the old building, used to face the Chicago River and the Billygoat Tavern(aka Cheeseburger, no coke, pepsi--but I digress). All my contacts do me no good. My family laughs at my rants at Bob Novack. He's an institutuion, I guess. But, he's no Mike Royko.
Is it a waste of time? Yea, I guess so, but it feels good to publicaly shame people like Novack or Zogby, and I will continue with the good fight: sometimes the urge to charge the windmills cannot be stopped.
Posted by: biorabbi at May 25, 2006 6:51 PM
Serves him right for having a Petard in this day and age.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at May 25, 2006 9:47 PM
Hyde is an "Idiot" always has been, 911 exposed him and others as the idiots that they are. But if you must be an idiot why not "Hyde" amongst a forest of idiots.
No pun intended?
at May 26, 2006 12:51 AM
Thats Forrest. I hate this East German keyboard!
Posted by: tgusa at May 26, 2006 12:57 AM
My goodness what enlightenment these precious lucid paragraphs bring ! Thank you Hugh.
How devilishly clever to disguise the Jihad against Israel, presenting it in western territorial terms for the benefit of the secular western mind!
The art of islamic deceit truly has no equal.
And how foolish the westerners and many Israelis too, who refused to recognise the truth which lay only just below the surface.
And whilst preocupied with the veiled lesser jihad, the europeans were blinded to the greater Jihad in their own countries and under their very noses.
How those Mullahs must have laughed in their beards at western stupidy during those years.
Why have the Israelis for all those years, given their intellect, refused to acknowledge the true nature of the war being waged against them?
at May 26, 2006 2:04 AM
The Islamo-christians seem to be too proud to beg the Jews to assist them to secure their holy sites. If Israel did help them in any way, they would probably hate them even more...
so why should we?
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at May 26, 2006 7:05 AM
Hugh, thanks for digging this article out again: Excellent!
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at May 26, 2006 7:07 AM
If this Dr. A. Carlebach is Dr. Azriel Karlibach (the way the name is transliterated here), then Said may have met his match.
Karlibach, the legendary publisher and editor of the Marriv daily, was a scholar who knew his way around Islam, and has written a book about India, which despite being published in 1954 is still a best-seller.
Posted by: Yossi Gurvitz at May 26, 2006 7:32 AM
"...then Said may have met his match."
-- from a posting above
But it was never a case of Said "meeting his match." Carlebach was not debating him; he, Said, was quoting Carlebach in the belief that what Carlebach had written was self-evidently absurd, but readers reading those words of Carlebach today, in 2006, after all the attacks world-wide by Muslim terrorists acting not on some "perversion" of Islam but on what Islam inculcates, will read Carlebach quite differently.
And Said was not a "match" who had to be "met." All of his political writings (his literary scholarship hardly exists; his book on Conrad is the usual worthless tenure-application stuff which probably neither Said nor anyone else ever bothered to read) were silly. The British historian, twenty years after the appearance of "Orientalism," noted that
"When Edward Said's Orientalism first appeared in 1978, historian after historian must have put it down without finishing it — without imagining, for a moment, the influence it would exert. It was, technically, so bad; in every respect, in its use of sources, in its deductions, it lacked rigour and balance. The outcome was a caricature of Western knowledge of the Orient, driven by an overtly political agenda. Yet it clearly touched a deep vein of vulgar prejudice running through American academe."
In the ranks of MESA Nostra, Joel-Beinin-Rashid-Khalidi-Lisa-Anderson-Juan-Cole-Hamid-Dabashi and hundreds of others, this "deep vein of vulgar prejudice" remains, flourishes, is watered with the day's news and will not end. But the days of MESA Nostra are numbered.
at May 26, 2006 1:00 PM
"but readers reading those words of Carlebach today, in 2006, after all the attacks world-wide by Muslim terrorists acting not on some "perversion" of Islam but on what Islam inculcates, will read Carlebach quite differently."
The locution "readers reading those words" is, probably judiciously, vague: it could mean "all readers", or "most readers", or "almost but not quite a majority of readers", or "many but still a relatively though encouragingly growing by leaps and bounds small minority of readers", or -- my preference (prefering the hard truth to comforting inflations thereof) -- "a still grievously and, frankly, pathetically small minority of readers".
at May 26, 2006 3:33 PM
Very much like the warnings Churchill gave about the real nature of Nazi Germany that continually fell on deaf ears until it was too late.
Posted by: londongirl at May 27, 2006 8:02 AM
I see that Yossi Gurwitz is a great admirer of George Orwell. Indeed, we have a lot to learn from him. One of the blots on Orwell's record, nevertheless, was his association with Christopher Mayhew, one of the great Judeophobes in the British govt, now deceased. Mayhew set up a group of Labour Members of Commons who were pro-Arab. Mayhew was probably very pro-Muslim too.
Someone else, marvelling over `Azriel Karlibakh's words, asked wondered why Israelis don't follow Karlibakh and see the danger in Islamic jihad that indeed threatens us. Those who can read Hebrew --Yossi Gurwitz of course-- are referred to the bi-monthly Nativ, which carries articles by important scholars on modern Islam, on jihad, on Arab-Muslim history, etc. These include Rafael Israeli, Moshe Sharon, Mordekhai Nisan, David Bukay, and others. Many articles in Nativ are also published on the Internet in English summaries at: www.acpr.org.il I think that that's the address. Sometimes full articles are published in English. For Yossi's info, yours truly, Eliyahu ben Abraham, once published an article in Nativ in January 2001 [as I recall], in which I quoted at length from his hero Orwell on how leftists and pacifists helped to bring about World War Two. Yossi calls himself leftist and liberal. In my opinion, the whole notion of a political spectrum is ridiculous. The sooner that intelligent people throughout the world stop using it, the better.
by the way, Nativ once reprinted Karlibakh's essay quoted above.
Posted by: Eliyahu at May 29, 2006 6:13 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)