I wrote the president of Emory twice. Lets see if he is man enough to respond.

Posted by: Elric66 at October 31, 2007 10:06 AM

The only thing the 2nd Lebanon war proved was that when a nation is led by idiots and is constantly flogged and influenced by a biased media even a highly trained army can't handle a bunch of bandits. In an earlier time Israel would have mopped up the desert with Hizbollah, PR be damned.

As for the "soul" of palestine what the hell is Ashrawi talking about? There is no soul there. One might as well call Satan holy.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 31, 2007 10:25 AM

Palestinians are experiencing "one of the most difficult phases in our history," she said. "Violence and [the] extreme ideology of Israel feed violence and extremism on the other side. And that's what led to the election of Hamas."

Interesting....wasn't the elections the Pals ever had? The first opportunity Pals had to vote, they voted for a party that just decided to run, that was never interested in politics before....was only a terror org. Their first opportunity and they voted Hamas....what led to the election of Hamas is the simple fact Hamas stands for terrorizing Jews, which the majority of Palestinians agree with.

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader at October 31, 2007 10:32 AM

Yes, this is the same woman who defends the "palestinian" cause, calls herself a "christian".
Islamochristian is more like it. She is the one who Peter Jennings dated.
http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/Elberg/Ashrawi/Ashrawi.html

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

Posted by: interestinconundrum at October 31, 2007 10:36 AM

I'm still trying to understand why Mahmoud Amadinejhad was so well received with cheers, and applauses at Columbia University? What specifically was going on at that campus that would incourage such a friendly response to Amadinejad? Can we look at certain professors that may be in David Horowitz's book? Can we look at the influences of the Muslim Students Association? Who or what on that campus among several other campuses is turning these little heads of mush into leftwing Zombies who appear to have no clue about the true distinctions between American society, and values as compared to those of the Islamic society in Iran?

"To defend your foundations; you must be able to define it" To defeat your enemy; you must be able to define them"

General Douglas MacArthur

Posted by: Mackie at October 31, 2007 10:44 AM

I met a cute Israeli chick at a health fair last year. What drew me to her table were the books by Swami Prabhubada. I could tell from her accent that she was Israeli, so we chatted in Hebrew.

"Are you Jewish or Hindu?" I asked.
"Hindu," she replied.
"So, do you miss Israel," I asked.
"Not at all," she replied.
"Why not," I continued.
"It's intolerant. There's no freedom of religion," she said.
"How so?"
"Well, we can't build an ashram."
"Really?"
"Really," affirmed her Israeli boyfriend. "The Rabbis won't allow it."

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at October 31, 2007 10:44 AM

Re: And the Leftist thugs who shouted down David Horowitz were nowhere in evidence, of course.

It's the Nazi-Soviet Alliance of 1939. Of course, Stalin and Russia nearly got devoured by the Nazis after June 22, 1941. The left of that time turned on a dime after they were in the cross-hairs of the Nazis. (BTW, many of the anti-war war groups of that period were funded by Nazi Germany and Stalin. The Left allied with the Jew haters. History is repeating itself on this.)

Stalin (also a deceiver) made a bad judgement re the true intentions of Ribbentrop. However, I think Molotov was not keen on the alliance, but he dared not oppose Stalin. I think Molotov wanted to ally with the West and people like Churchill.

Posted by: Frank at October 31, 2007 10:47 AM

How does this woman "defend" Hamas while at the same time "blaming" Israel for Hamas' victory in Palestinian elections? How is it a defense of Hamas to say that conditions in Gaza had worsened "since Hamas seized power"?

Where is the Palestinian who is willing to talk peace? Where was that person in 2000? What will Palestinians offer to achieve peace?

Posted by: PMK at October 31, 2007 10:48 AM

Mackie,

"To defend your foundations; you must be able to define it" To defeat your enemy; you must be able to define them"

That is so true. The West does neither.

Posted by: Elric66 at October 31, 2007 10:50 AM

The Palis lost all pretences of being victims and peace seekers when they elected an islamic terrorist group to represent them.

Posted by: Elric66 at October 31, 2007 10:54 AM

The Palis lost all pretences of being victims and peace seekers when they elected an islamic terrorist group to represent them.

Posted by: Elric66 at October 31, 2007 11:06 AM

>>>"The [Second Lebanon] War proved [Israel] could not defeat a nation fighting for freedom," Ashrawi said. Later, the Christian lawmaker blamed Hamas's January 2006 election victory on Israel, saying the occupation bred extremism.

Sounds like you could post this on dhimmiwatch as well. This guy sounds like a thoroughly cowed (i.e. brainwashed) dhimmi (he's a "Christian" lawmaker who spouts the Muslim line.

In a way, I feel sorry for him; but his attitude speaks volumes about what centuries of Muslim occupation will do to the unfortunate dhimmis who live under said occupation -- he actually believes the Muslim propaganda.

Speaking of dhimmis, something occurred to me last night: The koran allows "infidels" to continue with their non-Muslim religion, if they pay the poll tax. This is known as "protected status". Kind of like the protection racket that the mafia offers people of a given neighborhood -- pay the protection tax, and you'll live in relative safety.

If you think about it, Islam is nothing more than mafia-style organized crime. You have three options: join the family; pay the protection money; or we kill you.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at October 31, 2007 11:11 AM

"Nearly 75 percent of Gazans were dependent on welfare and the Strip's unemployment rate had skyrocketed to 50%, she said, adding that conditions there had worsened since Hamas seized power in June."
================================================

Gazans demand that they be supported by the welfare state, funded by Israel! This is a modern-day example of Jizyah.

Posted by: CTYankee at October 31, 2007 11:17 AM

>>Are Islamists behind the...recent freeway bridge collapse in Minnesota? If they are, the truth must be told...

Posted by: The Resistance at October 31, 2007 10:52 AM

I suspect that they are, for two reasons:

(1) Minnesota is a hotbed of Muslim extremism

(2) The bridge collapsed so cleanly, it had to have been sabotage.

The problem I have is, we're afraid, as a society, to investigate the possibility if Islamic terrorism. Therefore, we will ignore the "elephant in the room", no matter how often, and how loudly, the Muslim extremists say that they're going to do stuff like knock out bridges.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at October 31, 2007 11:19 AM

PersonOfTheBook and Resistance, you are sounding like those "truthers" that keep disrupting occasions with their asinine 911 conspiracy crap. The truthers seem to think "the towers collapsed so cleanly, it had to be sabotage" as well.

Posted by: TheOmegaMan at October 31, 2007 11:30 AM

I sort of like the concept of "Mt. Spencer."

Posted by: MP at October 31, 2007 11:35 AM

PersonOfTheBook:

I have quite a bit more confidence in our authorities, and experts that they would had advised quite readily if the Bridge in Minnesota had been sabotaged in anyway.

Please; let us not get caught up in the underground conspiracy theories on Jihadwatch without any obvious factual evidence coming forward on this tragedy.

Posted by: Mackie at October 31, 2007 11:55 AM

Is she still plying her trade before the public ?

Why would anyone listen to either her or her partner in crime, Erakat ?

It's jihad baby., jihad jihad jihad jihad.

That's the 800 pound gorilla in the room, jihad.

The next time anyone is foolish enough to give her a forum - would like to precede and follow her talk with a small chant.

Until even the MSM will be woken up.

Posted by: dgene at October 31, 2007 11:57 AM

Ashrawi siad:

Nearly 75 percent of Gazans were dependent on welfare and the Strip's unemployment rate had skyrocketed to 50%, she said, adding that conditions there had worsened since Hamas seized power in June.
....................................

This is what a fully "independent Palestine" looks like--violent, stagnant, increaingly Islamic. One of the first thing the Palestinians did after the last Jewish settler had left was to vandalize and destroy the greenhouses that philanthropic American Jews had thoughtfully purchased for them to help build the Palestinian economy.

more:

"Violence and [the] extreme ideology of Israel feed violence and extremism on the other side. And that's what led to the election of Hamas."

I suppose the "extreme ideology of Israel" is now embodied in politicians such as Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni, who cluelessly and hopefully presided over the handover of Gaza. It now looks as though they are poised to hand over all or most of the West Bank and even Jerusalem. Will the brutality never end?

Why isn't Hamas busy "fixing potholes" and creating jobs, as the West so hopefully believed they would? The are too busy shelling Sderot and viciously attacking their Fatah rivals for anything like that. Of course, the first thing Hamas' Fatah victims did was flee to the Israelis for saftey, and then bitterly critisize them for not being quick enough about it.

Obviously the only thing that will help is yet more aid from Israel and the West to ease the "plight of the Palestinians."

Posted by: gravenimage at October 31, 2007 12:08 PM

OY!!

Actually Hanan Ashrawi is a "she" not a "he" and she is/was a Yasser Arafat ass licker like most of the palestinian pols. So everything she says must be taken with a spoonful of salt and then spat out...

What irks me though, being lebanese and all, is that people assume that Lebanon went to war with israel last year. IN FACT it was hizballah, a foreign funded and foreign manned mafia, styling itself as a "lebanese" resistance movement (resistance to what we are not sure), that started the conflict by killing and kidnapping israeli soldiers...IT WAS NOT THE LEBANESE!!. The lebanese however suffered and in many respects continue to suffer because of hizballahs usurping of Lebanons foreign policy...like the decision to go to war.

In any event, even though they started the conflict by the time of the cease fire israel had started to wipe the floor with them and hizballah were begging the government (which they did not consult on going to war) to help bring about a cease fire. Our pussy PM obliged them and cried to the world begging them to stop those meanie jooooooz from kicking hizballahs ass. By the way, that decision is comming back to bite our pussy PM on his manicured ass.

That speaks volumes. I don't think that israel has anything to worry about. Granted there were some tactical and strategic blunders made early on, which could have been avoided if they had just telephoned any lebanese citizen, they were in the end getting it right and they were begining to hurt hizballah. You see from a psych level hizballah has always proclaimed that it can defend lebanon but when the shit started hitting the fan and large swaths of the shia section of the city were flattened it became apparent to average people and supporters that hizballah could do nothing but...talk.

Unfortunately israel had to stop. Imagine if israel was able to actually force hizballah to surrender or better yet...liquidate enough of them and their waepons to make them a spent force what the middle east would look like now. The very last needle in the haystack would have been removed. Syria and Iran would no longer have their proxy army just a few dozen kilometres from their border. peace would have been given a real chance

Oh well...next time i suppose:-)

Posted by: Shunkleash at October 31, 2007 12:22 PM

The "Second Lebanon War proved that Israel could not defeat a nation fighting for its freedom"?? No, it proved that there is absolutely no reason to ever listen to, trust, consider, or appease the UN and its absolutely lame, impotent, cowardly, ignorant and dhimmi agenda.

It also proved that when this all flares up again that there is no reason to show a molecule of restraint and every reason to completely annihilate ever single enemy, enemy stronghold, enemy refuge, and enemy supporter, and that means all the way up the chains, both to Iran and any palestinian terrorist or organization on the planet.

Furthermore, it proves that giving land for peace is a one-sided affair, because the satanic, muslim palentinians will never be peaceful, and should be abandoned for all time and all the land should be reclaimed with extreme prejudice.

Ya, thanks, Hez and Ham, you taught us all some good lessons. You taught us that muslims don't deserve to be privileged citizens of a civilized world because you cannot act civilly. You can not be trusted with land or power and you can not be trusted to perform acts of non-aggression on any continent.

You leave Israel and the west with few options because of your insolence. We can either submit to you and be conquered, or we can ourselves squash you. There are no other options because you prove to be unwilling to participate in co-operative societies.

Gee, what a great neighbor you turned out to be. Not.

Posted by: angryeagle at October 31, 2007 12:26 PM

Are Islamists behind the California wild fires and recent freeway bridge collapse in Minnesota? If they are, the truth must be told...

Posted by: The Resistance

From the AP:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071031/D8SK717G0.html

Officials blamed a wildfire that consumed more than 38,000 acres and destroyed 21 homes last week on a boy playing with matches, and said they would ask a prosecutor to consider the case.

Posted by: PMK at October 31, 2007 12:28 PM

It is interesting how these articles continually refer to Ashrawi as a "Christian lawmaker" simply because of her ancestry. Calling her a Christian is the same as calling Karl Marx a Lutheran just because his father was convert to Lutheranism.

Hanan Ashrawi's father Daoud Mikhail was a born into a Christian family in Nablus but abandoned his upbringing for socialist radicalism. Her mother Wadia was Lebanese. Both abandoned the ancient church of their ancestors for a leftist version of liberal protestantism. Ashrawi, a former girlfriend of Peter Jennings, is a completely Westernized elitist who has virtually no contact with the Palestinian Christian community and even less support from them. According to her own cousin, she is a creation of the western media who is only interested in self-promotion.

It is tragic that western academics and policy-makers listen to charlatans like Ashrawi while completely ignoring the overwhelming majority of Palestinian Christians who are facing complete destruction.

Posted by: Provoslavni at October 31, 2007 1:40 PM

Mackie:

I'm not saying that the Muslims sabotaged the bridge in Mineapolis, only that there is some indication that they may have. Therefore, we need to investigate that possibility.

Usually, the authorities fall all over themselves in telling us that it couldn't possibly be Muslim terrorists who did things like that, even when there are strong indications that it was.

The sad thing about our "post-western" society is that when these things occur, there is far more evidence pointing to Muslims than to any other group; but there is far more push to not accuse the Muslims than for any other group.

This disconnect is what bothers me.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at October 31, 2007 1:57 PM

Still no response to either of my e-mails.

If the jihadists did destroy that bridge, you would have thought you would have heard the boastings by now.

Posted by: Elric66 at October 31, 2007 2:03 PM

Sounds like you could post this on dhimmiwatch as well. This guy sounds like a thoroughly cowed (i.e. brainwashed) dhimmi (he's a "Christian" lawmaker who spouts the Muslim line.

Posted by PersonOfTheBook

SHE is a Palestinian lawmaker who previously dated ABC's Peter Jennings, but I didn't know she was a Christian until this posting. She's masculine and homely looking.

Posted by: Bonniea at October 31, 2007 2:31 PM

"If the jihadists did destroy that bridge, you would have thought you would have heard the boastings by now.

Posted by: Elric66 at October 31, 2007 2:03 PM"

Perhaps it was a dry run. They were testing their abilities for future reference.

Or maybe there was some sort of jihadi competition between a couple of jihad groups, to see who could pull off something like that.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at October 31, 2007 2:36 PM

"SHE [Hanan Ashrawi] is a Palestinian lawmaker who previously dated ABC's Peter Jennings..."
-- from a posting above

"Dated" is demure. Jennings was a trooper, an any-port-in-a-storm-trooper, and famously indifferent to any decency of any kind. He paid tribute to an older, celebrated colleague, dying of cancer, by "dating" that dying colleague's wife.

Posted by: Hugh at October 31, 2007 2:40 PM

"SHE is a Palestinian lawmaker who previously dated ABC's Peter Jennings, but I didn't know she was a Christian until this posting. She's masculine and homely looking."

Posted by: Bonniea at October 31, 2007 2:31 PM

My mistake. No offense to the lady was intended.

Speaking of not knowing that she was a Christian, I would ask: does she ever say or do anything that a genuine Christian would?

For example:

* Does she ever try to share the gospel with anyone? I kind of doubt it, if the Muslims allowed her to have such a high position in the government.

* Does she love the Jews? They are, after all, the "People of the Book", as the Muslims call them. But she seems to speak of them in a condescending, mean-spirited way, just like the Muslims do.

(By the way, I am very happy and proud to be one of the "People of the Book", the Christians, and I am very honored to be lumped in with the Jews by the Muslims.)

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at October 31, 2007 2:49 PM

"The [Second Lebanon] War proved [Israel] could not defeat a nation fighting for freedom," Ashrawi said. Later, the Christian lawmaker blamed Hamas's January 2006 election victory on Israel, saying the occupation bred extremism.

a) -- Israel would have cleaned Hezbollah's clock had they not been compelled to stand down.

b) -- Yeah, that's why the PA has, for its entire existence, poured loadsa dough into media, mosques and schools to promote "martyrdom", eh?

Posted by: waterdragon52 at October 31, 2007 4:56 PM

As far as I can see, the state of the 'Palestinian territories' - i.e. Judea and Samaria - and of Gaza city, under the 'Palestinian authority' and now under Hamas, is merely a return to what the general state of 'Palestine' was at just about any point after the Muslim invasion and takeover in the 630s AD, up to and including the British mandate (since the British did very little to curb the Arab infighting and Bedouin raids). See James Parkes' 'Whose Land?', the chapters dealing with the Muslim period, 630s-1917. Or one could look through his bibliography and check out the original sources. Bat Yeor's The Dhimmi and Mose Gil's Legacy of Jihad in Palestine (which only covers the first half of the Muslim period, up to the Crusades), could also be consulted.

After the Muslim takeover, to be perfectly frank, all half-way decent government ceased and the place sank into what might be summarised as perpetual lowlevel and highlevel warfare, with a few islands of order popping up here and there along the way, only to quickly disintegrate again.

The peasants and poorer townsfolk - whether Jewish, Samaritan, Christian, Druze or Muslim - suffered from the chaos resulting from neverending wars between the different Muslim dynasties, between Cairo and Baghdad, and on the microlevel, from perpetual Bedouin raids, which were never properly restrained by any Muslim overlord be he Arab or Turk, and the depredations of rapacious local warlords (who seem to have behaved much like mafia dons). In the 19th century one of these charming fellows, in what is now northern Israel, was nicknamed "The Butcher" (nuff said). Indeed James Parkes observes that one way the Turks maintained their power, in 'Palestine', the Lebanon and elsewhere, was by DELIBERATELY fomenting division and disorder among those they 'governed'.

The persons and property of any non-Muslim could at any time, unpredictably, be assaulted by any Muslim who felt like it; and redress was non-existent. And as for the poorer Muslims, though oppressed by their Muslim despots, they also made things even worse by perpetually fighting amongst themselves. People in Muslim Clan or Village A would conduct a never-ending feud with people from Muslim Clan or Village B - doing things like chopping down fruit trees, stealing and killing livestock, firing crops and damaging water sources. Between this and the extortionate practices of the tax collectors, it's a recipe for running down your resource base.

Any person or group that managed to prosper for a bit and actually grow, build or make something, would be sure to be pounced on, sooner or later, by their neighbours or rulers and whatever they had built would be robbed - or just mindlessly smashed.

To be quite frank, a read of James Parkes' summary of the history of 'Palestine' under muslim domination reads like an exposition of Hobbes' dictum concerning life in the 'state of nature' - nasty, poor, brutish and short. A war of all against all. And that's what they're getting stuck into, right now, all over again.

PS: I understand that during the 'Arab revolt' of the 1930s, what began as a 'revolt against British rule', and a campaign against the Jews, rapidly devolved into Muslim-Arab vs Muslim-Arab clan warfare, such that more Muslim Arab 'Palestinians' were killed by their fellow Muslim Arabs, than were killed fighting with the British or with the Jews. (And btw, the term 'Arab' used of 'Palestinian' Muslims, must be understood very loosely, since in the 19th century many Muslims with ethnic origins in Bulgaria, Bosnia and North Africa came into 'Palestine').

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at October 31, 2007 6:16 PM

That awful, awful Islamochristian Ashrawi!

What kind of 'freedom' is she talking about? The freedom to murder Jews, the freedom to destroy Israel and to turn it into a Muhammedan desert?

Ashrawi is truly awful. She of all people should know what's in store for her if the Pali's get the upper hand. Is she really so deluded or so fanatically twisted?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 31, 2007 7:03 PM

Dumbledoresarmy:

I saw a comment somewhere recently:

"In general terms, both sides started from zero 60 years ago"

I rest my case.......

Posted by: PorkyPig at October 31, 2007 11:04 PM

sheik yer'mami at October 31, 2007 7:03 PM says:
"Is she really so deluded or so fanatically twisted?"

She's deluded AND fanatically twisted.

Posted by: Syndic Nuruodo at October 31, 2007 11:46 PM