"And didn't the Imam [Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini] teach that if every Muslim pours out one bucket of water, there will be a flood that will sweep away Israel, and destroy it?"

...what he did not teach....If every Muslim would pour a bucket of water on seeds in the ground, the land would become fertile again and crops could be raised to feed the country and to the farmers could sell crops to others....the country could become a contributor to society instead of a dealer in death....

Ban Muslim Immigration.

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 28, 2008 6:23 AM

America and its allies accuse it of terrorism
from the article

See they don't want us to call it terrorism either.
I guess the only thing left is Islam.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at January 28, 2008 6:40 AM

Everyone here note well: for anyone who hasn't already recognised his name, Mr Sayyed Hasan Shariatmadari, the editor of Kayhan, was no. 108 on the list of 138 Muslim 'scholars' who signed off on that Letter from the Muslims to the Christians, 'A Common Word', which was presented in October 2007.

I have been taking note every time any one of that list of 138 comes up expressing antisemitic and/or other sentiments offensive to human rights and civilised morality. So far I have amassed quite a dossier.

This is not the first such noting for Mr Shariatmadari. He is also on record as 1. denying the holocaust 2. calling for a bullet in the head of an Iranian expatriate TV presenter 3.laying claim to Bahrain and 4. spouting hatred against Israel and the USA and calling for their destruction.

His signature to the Letter - let alone the signatures of certain others, such as Ikrima Sabri, the current incumbent of the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, who has blatantly denied there was ever a Jewish temple on the Temple Mount - should have ensured that no Christian worthy of the name would accord that Letter a moment's consideration, let alone dignify it with a reply.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 28, 2008 6:46 AM

@dumbledoresarmy.
Where can we find the dossier? Do you send it to christian organizations / spokespersons?

Posted by: FransG at January 28, 2008 7:40 AM

The threats continue to come from Iran and half the free world sleeps, thinking only of today. Tomorrow or one day we will reap our failures to confront the enemy which is ISLAM.

Posted by: AMartinez at January 28, 2008 8:05 AM

This can't be pointed to enough. (It is interesting how silent "moderate" Muslims are on this.) But there is no chance for peace because of this reality. It is what it is.

"The next segment of Sura 2, verses 75-105, continues the Qur’an’s criticism of the Jews. When you read statements by Hamas leaders or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about Israel, remember that they view Israel and Jews through a Qur’anic prism. They have learned, if they have studied the Qur’an at all, that the Jews are the most perverse and guilty – as well as the craftiest and most persistent – enemies of Allah, Muhammad and the Muslims"-Robert Spencer.

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/06/24/blogging-the-qur%e2%80%99an-sura-2-%e2%80%9cthe-cow%e2%80%9d-verses-75-140/

Posted by: Frank at January 28, 2008 8:32 AM

Hey, is this the same Iran that the European Union is determined to pick up as the alternative gas supplier (Nabucco pipe line, supposed to provide Europe with Iranian and Caspian gas via Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, leaving out Serbia)? Europe is getting the taste of its own medicine, it prescribed to Israel and Serbia and it has deserved every bit of it! And the same applies to USA, that has been destroying Serbia for long time and is abandoning Israel.

Posted by: Serbian girl at January 28, 2008 8:52 AM

"In his op-ed, Shar'iatmadari stressed that American and European civilians must be harmed in these attacks, so as to make the U.S. and the European countries change their policy towards Israel."

I guess it hasn't occurred to Shar'iatmadari, that this might, just might cause the US to change its policy toward Iran. He doesn't know a lot about psychology, it seems.

More sabre-rattling from an impotent little country, with an impotent little leader.

The difference between their nukes and ours is that we know how to use ours. Ours have been tested, and sure enough, they go "boom".

Do they really, really want to take us on?

Posted by: Abscedere at January 28, 2008 9:58 AM

From the article: "The prevalent legal doctrine in both the Shi'ite school and the Sunni school is that it is permissible to attack anyone whom the enemy uses as a shield in the war against the enemies of Islam."

Israel came under much criticism during the second Lebanon war, even from the White House. Hezbollah and other Muslim terrorists hide amongst the civilian populace; intentionally.

I was reading a little of A. Bostom's "The Legacy of Jihad" yesterday. Page 252: "Permissible and forbidden methods of fighting" according to the Malikite school.

"In attacking a fortress containing children or women, recourse is not had to burning or flooding. If the enemy 'shields' himself behind children, leave him alone, UNLESS (emphasis mine) he is too dangerous; if he uses Muslims in this way, [fight him] without aiming at this (human) shield, provided that there is not too great a risk for most of the Muslims."

Posted by: monk at January 28, 2008 10:00 AM

Now now Serbian Girl. Just because

a) Carter and Reagan were pussies in the Iran hostage affair

b) Reagan help arm Iran in the Iran/Contra affair

c) Clinton made a partnership with VEVAK ( Iranian National Security ) so that Bin Laden could set up base in Europe and murder Infidels

d) Bush Jr handed Badhdad on a plate to Iran AND got rid of Iran's nemsis, Saddam, the only guy in the entire region who could keep Iran honest.

My, Serbian Girl, you are difficult to please.

Posted by: ewha1 at January 28, 2008 10:02 AM

The difference between their nukes and ours is that we know how to use ours. Ours have been tested, and sure enough, they go "boom".

Do they really, really want to take us on?

Abscedere,

You better believe it. The US won't use its nukes. Too many "innocents" would be hurt if we used even a tactical nuke, to say nothing of the possible damage to the Mediterranean. They declared war on us when they invaded our embassy in 1979 and we didn't say boo. They know they can attack us at their leisure.

They can't lose. Either they defeat Goliath or they go down in flames in a glorious (however pyrrhic) victory for Islam which dared to stand up to the great colossus.

Of course their nuclear program is "defensive". The best offense is a good defense.

Posted by: PMK at January 28, 2008 10:35 AM

The US is safe if Obama gets the nod. I just read in the Jpost that he has our old friend Brezniski (sp?) as his advisor on the ME.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at January 28, 2008 11:03 AM

"Property"?

Well, what "property" is now in the hands of Iran? It long ago seized the assets of Western oil companies, long ago seized whatever else it could. And perhaps, here and there, the Iranians could do a bit of damage to Western economic interests.

But here's what the West can do. It can blockade shipments of Iranian oil. It can push the Iranians off of Al Musa and Greater Tunb and Little Tunb, and then hand them over to the U.A.E. (or not, depending on how we feel about the U.A.E., for we could seize them, hold onto them, and explain that we are doing so in order to better "secure" the shipping lanes "on which so many of the world's oil-consuemrs depend"). It can support a "restive" (as in Thailand) Arab southwest, and demand that the Arabs of that area of Iran be recognized as the "Khuzistanian people" every bit as "legitimate" as the "Palestinian people" whom the government of Iran seems so eager to support.

That's for a start.

Then there is Dubai, that higher-priced but not-less-vulgar Las Vegas of the Middle East, with those 7-star (self-awarded) luxury hotels, and those apartments for all kinds of rich Muslims and the creepiest kind of well-heeled Infidels. Dubai is where many rich Iranians, including those mullahs with their ill-gotten gains, invest their hundreds of billions of dollars. But that investment depends on the continuning security of Dubai. What if Iranian investments were to be sharply reduced in value, by Dubai becoming, not a safe haven, but a deliberate target for Western retaliation, should any Western property be damaged, or Westerners harmed, by Iran -- for any reason or no reason?

That can be discussed, that can be bruited about, now. And the mere discussion, the mere bruiting about, will cause some investors to hesitate. Those skyscrapers, one after another, in Dubai create such an easy, such a target-rich, environment. I wouldn't invest a penny there. And there are ways to make those Iranian investments become worth far less than those Iranians contemplated -- and not necessarily by doing a thing, but by threatening to do many things.

Something for the Iranians to think about.

Posted by: Hugh at January 28, 2008 11:25 AM

I support a surprise take-over of Iranian off-shore facilities as a first step in protecting Strait of Hormuz tanker traffic, and showing the Mullahs that their words will have further consequences if they persist in their disrespect.

Posted by: spartanoak at January 28, 2008 11:57 AM

"The US is safe if Obama gets the nod. I just read in the Jpost that he has our old friend Brezniski (sp?) as his advisor on the ME.

Posted by: Aunt Bea"

...and John Edwards for Secretary of State....

....when the dhimmicrats say "change"...they really mean it...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 28, 2008 12:16 PM

"blockade shipments of Iranian oil"?
No American president will interfere with the free flow of oil through the Persian Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz, for fear of what it will do to world markets. This might have worked in 1979, but now it can't be done. The world has changed.

Posted by: PMK at January 28, 2008 12:27 PM

Isn't it time we saw this for what it really is - a bald and brazen declaration of war if in the mad mullahs eyes, we support Israel. It is a declaration of war againstr the US, European countries and Israel in one fell swoop. If we can see this, then why can't Bush, Olmert and the rest of Europe's leaders? But then 40 or 45 years of political correctness has blinded us to the obvious, and we are too scared to use our power in a way that our ancestors would never have been.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at January 28, 2008 12:46 PM

Americans have been supporting Israel for many years on and despite such nasty sabre-rattling from the mullahs we haven't had to withstand noticeable numbers of civilian casualties (9-11 is the exception).

As far as "war crimes" are concerned,now, it's funny that the Muslims mention these because I have often observed that many Palestinian military attacks against Israel are launched from civilian residential areas full of Palestinian noncombatantss; the same is true in Afghanistan and other Islamic areas where jihad wars dominate the scene; in short, many Palestinian Authority's wartime practices amount to nothing less than their using their own Muslim citizens as human shields because of course when Israel strikes back it at the PA it is forced to realiate against military installments in places where non-combatants are sure to be killed as these people have been intentionally put in the line of fire by their Muslim government. Such devious and criminal war conduct is in violation of the Geneva Convention (which may once have been useful for something other than being a rhetorical springboard for Europeans to lob ugly and often untrue accusations against their American protectors).

How many people here remember when Yasser Arfat brought troops of his "poor Palestinians" into Lebanon (at the mullahs' behest most likely) and massacred tens of thousands of poor Maronite Christians who were guilty of nothing other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Muslims concerned about war crimes. That's a joke. Islam itself is the biggest war crime I know of.

Posted by: pythagoras at January 28, 2008 12:54 PM

One answer to this threat would be a NATO-like solution, whereby which the American government declares that just as an "attack" on any member of NATO (that includes, at this point, and amazingly, Turkey) is considered to be an attack on the United States, so -- from now on -- any attack on Israel will be similarly regarded. Howls of protest, of course, all kinds of manufactured hysteria that will scare some, temporarily, but then, if the Americans show themselves determined and resolute (and during an election campaign is a good time to have a little display of that determination, that resolution, that at other times may not be on such display)but what the Arabs and Muslims do? Can they stop the sale of oil which is the sole source of Arab wealth? And threats to "destabilize" the American economy, which could be met by counter-threats, if not stated than clearly implied, that just as the assets of German nationals were seized as the property of "enemy aliens" during World War II, the same could be done with illiquid assets, or liquid assets not liquidated in time, of Saudis, Kuwaitis, Emiratians, and others -- and they could be denied access to Western medical care, education, technology of every kind.

And if there were temporary turmoil in oil markets? From here on out, there will be turmoil in the oil-peaking oil markets. And besides, a little turmoil makes oil ever less attractive, and other sources of energy ever more desirable, ever more likely to be turned to, and relied on, and encouraged, and that is a good thing.

Posted by: Hugh at January 28, 2008 2:06 PM

"Once they discern that this support will cost them the property and lives of their citizens, they will doubtless reconsider their support for the savage Zionists...

We'll reconsider all right. Afterwards, you'll think the "savage Zionists" were your best friends.

Posted by: RalphInfidel at January 28, 2008 2:28 PM

Once they discern that this support will cost them the property and lives of their citizens, they will doubtless reconsider their support for the savage Zionists...

We'll reconsider all right. But afterwards, you may think the "savage Zionists" were your best friends.

Posted by: RalphInfidel at January 28, 2008 2:30 PM

Perhaps Columbia University would like to invite editor Hossein Shariatmadari to come to New York and address their School of Journalism. While here maybe authorities could arrange for his itinerary to include taking in a Toby Keith concert. I'm sure Toby would be happy to give him (and a soldier or two on leave in the audience) a back stage pass.

Posted by: Sojourner at January 28, 2008 3:19 PM

fransg

right now the dossier on the 138 'scholars' is an electronic file on my computer, which I've been gradually adding to. If you'd like a copy of same I could send an electronic version of it to Robert Spencer, and he could send it on to you. It's a work in progress that I do as I find time.

But thanks for the hint: instead of sitting on it I think I need to send my results so far - suitably framed - to the likes of, for example, the Anglican primate and the Catholic Archbishop in my home country, highlighting the presence on the list of a number of rabid antisemites.

Looked at from various angles, the list is a veritable data mine.

Now I'm just a 44 year old housewife - OK I've got academic training - with access to the internet.

Presumably the intelligence services in western countries, who have much better resources than I have - and for that matter the people who work for at least some of the higher-ranking Christian clergy to whom this thing was sent - have had the brains to do the obvious and ask themselves: just *who* are those 138 Muslim 'scholars', from which countries and *what* are they on record as saying previously?

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 28, 2008 4:00 PM

The US won't do anything against Iran-that much is obvious. But can it at least tell Iran to go to hell once in a while?

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at January 28, 2008 5:49 PM

In his op-ed, Shar'iatmadari stressed that American and European civilians must be harmed in these attacks, so as to make the U.S. and the European countries change their policy towards Israel.
-----------------------------

when will the American and European governments wake up and realize that Iran and the islamnazis across the world intend on destroying the west and full execute this war to save our nations???

how many terrorists attacks, bombs and nukes will have to go off in America and Europe before the dimwitted leaders wake up and take action???

does not anyone remember 1939 and nazi germany???

war is being waged against the west and nothing is being done by the dimwits in power...

Posted by: ??? at January 28, 2008 7:05 PM

does not anyone remember 1939 and nazi germany???

The answer seems to be "no", which is why we are condemned to endure that horror once again.

Posted by: PMK at January 28, 2008 9:45 PM

Are we on the brink of a Muslim version of "Kristallnacht"??

How wide a circulation has 'kayhan'? Who listens to Shariatmadari?

I 'read the whole thing' and came across this paragraph.

It reads, to me, as an open incitation, even a command, to Muslims everywhere in the Infidel world to attack Jews, and Jewish institutions, WITHIN THAT INFIDEL WORLD.

Quote:

“"But aren't most of the sensitive centers of the Zionists, of the Americans, and of some European states that support Israel already situated within the arms' reach of the Muslims?

"And aren't the Zionists [vulnerable] and located within arms' reach of the Muslims *at the four corners of the earth*? {MY EMPHASIS}. What human and legal basis can prevent an attack on these centers and people?"

If our politicians were on the ball, they would know about this threat. They would take it seriously.

And they would be letting it be known that if a Muslim 'citizen' or resident of a non-Muslim country physically attacks a Jewish person, that Muslim and all their family will be deported, one-way ticket out.

That if even ONE synagogue in a 'western' country is attacked by Muslims, then ten mosques in that country, beginning with whichever ones are closest to that synagogue and working outwards, will be shut down, permanently, and their imams deported. And if there is any whingeing or threats, then ANOTHER ten mosques will be shut down, and so on.

And if the Israeli embassy or consulate is attacked, in, say, the USA, then the ambassadors of Muslim-dominated countries, currently present, will be firmly requested and required to shut up shop and go home.

Unfortunately, I don't see anyone having the guts to take this level of action.

Therefore, to all Jewish posters and lurkers here, not those in Israel so much as those in the diaspora - perhaps you should bear in mind the Book of Esther, chapter 3: 8-13. Mr Shariatmadari - the mouthpiece of Khamenei, of Muslim Iran - has spoken as a modern-day Haman.

No countervailing order, as in Esther 8, will be given this time: the government of Persia is entirely controlled by Amalek.

Nevertheless, the principle involved in 8: 11-13, and 9: 1-5 should perhaps be taken to heart by all diaspora Jewish communities and their non-Jewish friends and neighbours, those who care about them and want to help.

If you live next to a Jewish synagogue, if you know a Jewish person - warn them about this frightful Haman-style incitation, and ask them how you can help.

Neighbourhood Watch and beat policemen - step up your vigilance if you have Jewish people and institutions within your 'patch' - keep an eye open for would-be Muslim jihad raiders casing the joint.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 28, 2008 11:00 PM

Just in case it was unclear:

in my posting above, when I wrote "the principle involved in 8: 11-13 and 9:1-5", I should have written "the principle involved in Esther 8:11-13 and Esther 9: 1-5",.

To remind all us non-Muslim gentiles of what may be, morally, required of us, here is part of the personal story of Judith Cassab, Jewish-Australian painter. She describes the final year of the war, in Hungary:

"The fight for Budapest went on. Immediately the Nazis began evacuating the Jews from Jewish houses. I asked the military commandant in the factory to help me get my husband out. He escorted us to my Uncle Gyuszi's flat, which he shared with his gentile girlfriend, Manyi. She was already hiding a mother and child, and welcomed Jancsi."
"The next day Jancsi had decided to move into the ghetto. He thought it would be better than this furtive existence."

" Melodramatically, I declared, 'If you go into the ghetto, so do I'. The doorbell rang and Kati and Frici, his oldest [Gentile] friends, fell upon him in an embrace. Kati was an actress and Frici a film director. 'Thank god we have found you! We've looked for you everywhere in Budapest. And now you are coming with us and we will hide you.'
'You are mad!' he answered. 'Don't you know that those who are hiding Jews are being shot too?'
'For God's sake,' said Kati, 'What are friends for?' And so we took Jancsi to Róna ucca, in Zuglò.
He spent three months there. Whenever a stranger came to the door he hid in a wardrobe. Not only did Kati and Frici risk their lives, they also risked their family, who had escaped from Debrecen before the Russians occupied it."

Let's think about that exchange. "Don't you know that those who are hiding Jews are being shot too?"
"For God's sake', said Kati, 'What are friends for?"

Shariatmadari, presumably as mouthpiece of the Muslim regime in Iran, has encouraged Muslims to attack Jews worldwide and to also attack any nation - and by implication, any person - who helps either the Jewish state, or any Jew.

I don't know how many out of the world's billion or so Muslims will hear that call to arms, and of those who do, how many may act upon it. There will be some who do.

So it is now the job of all decent human beings to be on watch, and be prepared, if necessary, to place themselves in between the Jihad and the Jews.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 29, 2008 7:36 AM