Alwaleed has already spent so much money, as this piece shows in part, that he could be a prime explanation for why the mainstream media marches in lockstep in favor of Sharia and whitewashing jihad, with nary a dissenting voice standing for freedom. And it is going to get much, much worse: what he has spent so far is just a drop in the ocean compared to what he is going to spend now.
“Arab Bill Gates Could Turn ‘Shariah Creep’ Into Full Trot,” Investor’s Business Daily, July 7, 2015:
Islamofascism: Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a senior member of the Saudi monarchy, says he’ll pledge his $32 billion fortune to charity. In light of his past donations, this is a highly concerning development.
Alwaleed says he will model his endowment on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, only with a twist: Much of his philanthropic work will help “foster cultural understanding” of Islam in America and the West.
That means promoting the kingdom’s brand of Islam, while censoring criticism of Islam.
Published reports and books reveal Alwaleed already has pledged millions to radical Muslim Brotherhood front groups that have a secret plan to Islamize America and spread Shariah law throughout the West. These pro-jihad groups can now count on a massive and virtually endless infusion of cash to their war chests.
Alwaleed has extensive ties to Brotherhood leaders. For example, he tapped “tele-Islamist” Tariq Al-Suwaidan, widely reported to be a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Kuwait, as the channel director of his Islamic religious TV outlet Al Risala.
The network’s “Supreme Advisory Committee” has included Abdullah Omar Naseef, whom ex-federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy says is “a major Muslim Brotherhood figure” who has helped raise funds for al-Qaida.
Alwaleed made headlines after 9/11 when he donated $10 million to the World Trade Center fund only to have then-New York mayor Rudy Giuliani return the check. After presenting the money, the Saudi billionaire issued a press statement blaming the terrorist attacks on U.S. support for Israel while “our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of the Israelis.”
The next year, Alwaleed donated a whopping $27 million to a Saudi telethon for the violent Palestinian intifada against Israel, according to the Clarion Project.
Also in 2002, he gave $500,000 to the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, which federal authorities have linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.
In 2005, moreover, he spent $40 million to expand Islamic studies at U.S. colleges — donating $20 million to Harvard University to create a campuswide Shariah law studies program, while pumping another $20 million into Georgetown University for a “Muslim-Christian understanding” program run by notorious Islamic apologist John Esposito.
Despite fawning press reports, Alwaleed’s charitable pledge is no cause for celebration. It’s cause for alarm. His billions will finance Islamist pressure groups who exist to force Western civilization to yield to Islamic no-go zones, Shariah courts and blasphemy laws.
If unmatched by patriotic philanthropists, the Saudi prince’s huge endowment could be a major setback for state and local efforts to push back against Islamization.
Stardusty Psyche says
“the mainstream media marches in lockstep in favor of Sharia and whitewashing jihad, with nary a dissenting voice standing for freedom”
Please cite the evidence that “the mainstream media marches in lockstep in favor of Sharia” Nonsense.
“nary a dissenting voice standing for freedom” More nonsense.
Robert Spencer says
Why don’t YOU name a single mainstream media journalist who tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat. Then we’ll see.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Robert Spencer,
I agree with the spirit of the question you ask me, indeed, there is a deplorable lack of journalists who will tell the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, though the numbers are significant and growing.
Fox News has been around just a bit too long and strong to play the “we are outside the mainstream” card, and of course there are such journalists there. The Atlantic Magazine ran an article by Graeme Wood that featured the “controversial” statement “The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic”, frankly exposing the true nature of IS.
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
Anderson Cooper of CNN anchored a significant piece detailing the Islamic attacks on critics, and providing Ayaan Hirsi Ali airtime to say “This Is Embedded In a World Religion” and much else about the jihad threat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BrfIlgO05A
And so, Robert, I have above named more than “a single mainstream media journalist”, but I agree the numbers are upside down with the “the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat.”
I will ask you in return, please name for me a single mainstream media journalist “in favor of Sharia”…in favor of death to apostates, death for homosexual acts, death to critics, beating of women, marriage of a girl of 9, and other such provisions of Sharia. Your statement simply is not the case.
“nary a dissenting voice standing for freedom”? I could not possibly count the number of times I have heard mainstream journalists extolling the virtues of our great American freedoms. Again, your statement simply is not the case.
I have the greatest respect for your scholarship and most especially for your having put your life on the line for such a vital cause. From time to time I find a small percentage of your statements to be factually incorrect or otherwise objectionable so I hope you can view my criticisms in the constructive light I intend.
Jack Diamond says
To answer the question you’d have to understand what “the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat” means. Which you clearly do not. Anderson Cooper understands the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat because he interviews Hirsi Ali? That’s why Anderson Cooper mocked Michelle Bachman’s contentions about Muslim Brotherhood influence in the U.S. government and Huma Abedin in particular:
AC: (being sarcastic) “Huma Abedin’s deceased father, who started an organization decades ago, had the support of a guy who had another organization that might have had the support of another organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. And because of that, Huma Abedin might be some sort of spy or infiltrator and deserves to be investigated.”
Cooper then brought on Democratic congressman Keith Ellison, who was the first Muslim elected to Congress. “I think it just is the worst of guilt by association,” Ellison said. “…I think it’s really reprehensible and I do hope that people stand up to it.”
The outright dismissal of the very idea, (Huma Abedin could never pass muster for an ordinary security clearance), the unwillingness to even examine the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates in the United States and then to bring on Keith Ellison to bear witness, the favorite congressman of CAIR, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Circle of North America, the Muslim American Society and all the other Muslim Brotherhood groups he regularly addresses….this is not someone who understands the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat (and shall I explain to you jihad is much more than jihad of the sword? it is anything and everything to remove the obstacles to the spread of Islam).
Anderson Cooper after the jihad massacre at Fort Hood does a story about “Islamophobia” in the military. Anderson Cooper was a defender of the Ground Zero Mosque and implied those questioning its funding were un-American. Anderson Cooper who suggests accusations against Huma Abedin (and the Brotherhood) are a witch hunt, has no problem doing a hatchet job on anti-jihadists like Walid Shoebat.
And then there is his interview with the Draw Muhammad organizer where Cooper asks
incredulously ““You don’t believe that Islam, at it’s core, is terrorism?” and the reply:
“Oh yes, true Islam is terrorism. The ones that are out committing these atrocities, they are following the book as it’s written” Cooper regards as self-evidently ridiculous.
Jack Diamond says
oh and you are invited to name the Fox journalists who tell the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat: “there are such journalists there.” But again, you would have to understand the question being asked of you.
kay says
Re: I will ask you in return, please name for me a single mainstream media journalist “in favor of Sharia”.
Answer: Here it is. The smoking gun. The perp is Chris Cuomo.
Asking people to censor themselves is DIRECT support for Sharia subjugation of free speech. And this is very well known.
Proof.on CNN, with the Sharia collaborator Chris Cuomo:
http://pamelageller.com/2015/05/video-pamela-geller-debates-chris-cuomo-on-cnn.html/
CNN VIDEO: Pamela Geller Debates Chris Cuomo on Freedom of Speech
AFDI Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest TV Coverage
“One on one with Chris Cuomo.
Chris Cuomo and I have at it. He fights for sharia. I fight for freedom. His cutting me off constantly is annoying, but it is, after all, CNN.
They pretend it’s about not offending when at it’s all about fear. Cuomo told me off-camera that it is CNN policy not to run the cartoons because of fear of violence. In a word, submission.”
Stardusty has clearly never heard of CNN nor of the Garland Texas shootout or cartoon controversy. It’s all over the country for months.
I think Stardusty was dropped on the head when quite young. Everybody counts, but like Stardusty, not everyone counts to 10.
Check out the following wcangel comment on the above video ( 1 month back ). And feel free to give that comment a thumbs up and verbal support. Do support Pam Geller. It matters!
——————-
wcangel 1 month ago
She wins the debate at five minutes.
The cartoon was drawn by a former Muslim, not by her.
“Where do you draw the line?”
He’s right on one point : there ARE two schools of thought:
(1) western civilization
(2) Islamic law, which is based on conquest, slavery, subjugation of non-Muslims under Muslim rule, and preventing freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and so forth.
Chris Cuomo is obviously not supporting western civilization.
Instead he Does Not Want To Offend Islamic Law / Sharia. He wants to make nice with the supporters of Sharia Law, even and especially when they want to kill peaceful people in Garland Texas, at Charlie Hebdo in Paris France, in Denmark and so forth.
His brilliant idea is that if we all surrender, then they won’t cause us problems.
But once we negotiate by surrender, then the precedent is established for acceptance of Sharia Law. Which is the end of western civilization.
Thus, the only way to defend western civilization and counter Islamic law is to support free speech and NOT make nice with all the fascists and bloodthirsty murderers of Islam ( Boko Haram, al Qaeda, Taliban, Seleka, al-Shabab, etc. ).
In short, trying to be an inoffensive liberal or multiculturalist is means only one thing:
to fail to defend basic principles of fairness and respect and equality under the law.
Some people – and lots of people in the media – are claiming to be so stupid that they don’t get this at all.
Pamela Geller is a Jewish girl who supports free speech for all, including Nazis. She said so on camera in another youtube video.
In this video Chris Cuomo is challenging Pamela Geller after machine guns were drawn on her event and two hundred people! He wants to know why she thinks it is okay to cause so much trouble.
He doesn’t have any problem with Islamic State supporters attacking unarmed American citizens in Texas with machine guns.
He only asks why did she provoke Islamic State?
Thanks Chris Cuomo! This is how you will be known to the entire world from this time forward. You are a major public interviewer and from this time forward you have negative one hundred percent credibility. Loser.
Cuomo didn’t get the word that three million marched in Paris in solidarity with Charlie Hebdo this January. And in other cities in different countries He must think that they are all right wing too.
<>
Some claim that Pamela Geller is “horrible”. But Chris Cuomo is merely pathetic here
Chris Cuomo, yo momma raised a foo’. Feel free to die of shame.
For the record, this loser doesn’t even come up to Pamela Geller’s ankles.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Kay,
One on one with Chris Cuomo.
https://youtu.be/2tghjmUn-88
http://pamelageller.com/2015/05/video-pamela-geller-debates-chris-cuomo-on-cnn.html/
The words of Chris Cuomo:
In reference to the Garland shooters “the bad guys”
“They are not saying you don’t have the right, they are asking is it right”
“He (Geert Wilders) is an islamophobe who says ugly things about all Islam.”
“It is beyond dispute that what was done was wrong and terrible and that those 2 men paid the ultimate price”
“they bought into an ideology that is sick and negative and wrong”
“You have the right to do it”
“I understand you see it as a slippery slope”
After all that from Chris Pamela Geller writes:
“Chris Cuomo and I have at it. He fights for sharia.”
I suppose the nice way to characterize Geller’s assertion about Cuomo would be “untrue”. Perhaps a little sharper would be “nonsense”. In my heart of hearts I would think “loony tunes asinine crackpot conspiracy theory stupidity”.
Guess what folks, not everybody agrees with you. GTFU
Just because somebody questions the wisdom of your approach, or calls into question your tactics or the advisability or sensitivity of it does not mean “He fights for sharia”.
Get out of your little tunnel vision world. He said again and again she had the right, the shooters were the bad guys, the ideology they bought into was sick and wrong, you have freedom of speech.
Some people have a strong resistance to saying things they know will offend others. Is that really so hard for all the Pamela Geller sycophants out there to understand?
Pamela Geller was on the show! One does not “fight for sharia” by putting a vociferous opponent of sharia on the air and spend half the host’s time agreeing she has rights that do not exist under sharia.
People who think this is an example of “in favor of sharia” or “he fights for sharia” have fallen down the rabbit hole.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Jack Diamond,
“To answer the question you’d have to understand what “the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat” means. Which you clearly do not.”
It is apparent you have not happened to see the many times I have attributed a whole string of negative descriptions to Islam and characterized Islam as an existential threat, quite possibly the greatest the West has ever faced including National Socialism and Communism.
“Anderson Cooper understands the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat because he interviews Hirsi Ali?”
Straw man. Not my assertion. Your words, not mine.
Rober Spencer challenged me to ” name a single mainstream media journalist who tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat”. I successfully met that specific challenge.
“Journalist” is a key word here. Many notions exist as to what “journalist” does or should mean. In one ideal a journalist is neutral and does not comment on his or her personal views, rather, applies critical investigative techniques to all sides and reports accurately absent personal biases.
Hence the Fox news slogan “Fair and Balanced”. Of course, Fox is not unbiased, and neither is MSNBC or any other major news organization. Biases are sometimes blatant in the commentary, other times subtle by selective coverage.
Still, journalists tell the truth by putting people on the air, asking a few questions, and giving time to others who then put forth their views.
So yes, Anderson Cooper “tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat” by putting on Ayaan Hirsi Ali who does just that.
Later, he will put on a guest with an opposing view. That is what journalists do. Citing a long list of these instances does nothing to negate the fact I have successfully met the challenge made to me.
Here is a very clear example of how I successfully met that challenge:
Pamela Geller vs Imam Anjem Choudary on Fox News, Hannity: ‘You Want Her To Die!’ |FULL INTERVIEW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYCfP4Eg1B4
Clearly Sean Hannity, Pamela Geller, and even Anjem Choudary are telling “the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat” Choudary tries to justify and he is evasive at times but for the most part he arrogantly and smugly confirms directly what Hannity and Geller are saying.
Over the years I have seen and heard Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Pamela Geller, and even in his own disgusting way Anjem Choudary tell “”the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat” at the behest of a variety of journalists who provide first of all a platform for these views and additionally a very great deal more editorial support for them then just about anybody here at JW has the clear vision to see.
“But again, you would have to understand the question being asked of you.”
Sorry Jack, it is you who clearly does not understand the challenge that was put to me or the means by which I successfully met that challenge.
Jack Diamond says
You were asked to “name a single mainstream media journalist who tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat.” Not name a single mainstream media journalist who has ever had on a guest who tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihadist threat. In the case of Cooper out of his own mouth he clearly fails that test yet you named him. Cooper also has put on figures like Keith Ellison to lie about Islam. Shouldn’t Cooper then get credit for being a liar about Islam by having on a liar about Islam? This applies equally to any Fox journalist who has had on Robert Spencer…usually opposite a liar for Islam. Out of their own mouths you won’t find one Fox journalist who passes that test either. Including Sean Hannity who still thinks Islam has been hijacked.
You have not successfully met the challenge.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Jack Diamond,
For an ideal unbiased journalist the methodology for telling the truth is to present opposing viewpoints and let you decide the truth for yourself. So, yes, such an example does successfully meet the challenge put to me.
JD-“You were asked to “name a single mainstream media journalist who tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat.” Not name a single mainstream media journalist who has ever had on a guest who tells the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihadist threat. In the case of Cooper out of his own mouth he clearly fails that test yet you named him. Cooper also has put on figures like Keith Ellison to lie about Islam. Shouldn’t Cooper then get credit for being a liar about Islam by having on a liar about Islam? ”
Yes, Cooper should be given credit for presenting both sides and letting the viewer decide what is and is not true. That is the traditional methodology of journalistic truth telling, or at least one ideal of journalism.
But, I gave more examples.
Some journalists write or present personal opinions. That is editorial journalism and is another great form of journalism when no pretense of unbiased presentation is made while editorializing. To editorialize while pretending to be neutral is unethical.
I noted Fox news and I thought that was so obvious that no further details were required. But, even that was questioned so I later presented this specific example:
Pamela Geller vs Imam Anjem Choudary on Fox News, Hannity: ‘You Want Her To Die!’ |FULL INTERVIEW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYCfP4Eg1B4
I further provided the example of the article in the Atlantic that featured the “controversial” statement “ISIS is very Islamic” and a lot of other information about IS.
If I were to stretch the word “journalist” very thin I could potentially include infotainment sources, because, sadly, a lot of Americans actually have infotainment as their primary news source. However, I think 1 man does a serious job with a humerus note, Bill Maher, in particular on his sit down shows.
When you get Bill Maher and Sam Harris on one side, and Ben Afflek on the other side, well, that was enough of a dustup to get major news coverage on a variety of outlets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vln9D81eO60
Here are some words spoken on PBS, the Charlie Rose show:
“…Illiberal beliefs that are held by vast numbers of Muslims…Christians too, No!…Vast numbers of Christians do not believer if you leave the religion you should be killed for it, Vast numbers of Christians do not believe women should be treated as second class citizens…draw a picture you should get killed for it”
Not only were these words spoken on PBS television, they were picked up and discussed at length on FOX news
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daQ1rJQTndE
So, Jack, your claim simply is not the case. I have indeed successfully met the challenge put to me with multiple examples.
Christopher Hitchens (late), Sam Harris, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Mosab Hassan Yousef, Bill Maher, Sean Hannity, Robert Spencer, and Pamela Geller are getting the word out and getting coverage by journalists, writing books, getting published, speaking out on their own shows and telling “the truth about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat.”
The asserted vacuum in the statement ““name a single mainstream media journalist” simply is not the case.
Jack Diamond says
thank you, Mr. Jabberwocky. Continue galumphing along.
voegelinian says
Graeme Wood in that article Stardusty cites made the staggeringly sweeping claim that “nearly all Muslims” oppose ISIS:
“Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do.
How does Graeme Wood know this? Can he read the minds of over a billion people inhabiting some 70 nations of the world? Or is he just making a sweeping assumption, and painting all those millions of Muslims with a broad brush — a nice rosy hue, to match his glasses… much like Stardusty himself, ignoring the mountains of data and the oceans of dots screaming to be connected, which indicate a much more alarmingly systemic and metastasizing problem.
kay says
In that case Graeme Wood is proven to be a clueless idiot talking nonsense. The UNCHALLENGED Pew polls have been done in much of the Muslim world.
Indonesia is the largest Islamic country by population.
The Indonesian Muslims favor Sharia and jihad by a majority.
So says the Pew Poll. No one disagrees.
Sam Harris and others have pointed out these alarming statistics on television and everyone can see the reruns on youtube, as I do.
Anyone who cites such an ignorant, idiotic claim is also an ignorant idiot.
Hi Stardusty. Are you putting forward this clueless fool Graeme Wood?
If so you’ve lost very badly, TWICE, in just the last five minutes, on this single thread. Maybe Stardusty you need to figure out up from down.
There are many collaborationist types and many who fail to get to square one on the evidence and risks to the open society and western civilization.
See the following key book reference
Sharia Versus Freedom: The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism Hardcover – September 18, 2012
by Andrew G. Bostom (Author)
Hardcover: 735 pages
Publisher: Prometheus Books; 1St Edition edition (September 18, 2012)
ISBN-10: 1616146664
http://www.amazon.com/Sharia-Versus-Freedom-Islamic-Totalitarianism/dp/1616146664/
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Kay,
“Hi Stardusty. Are you putting forward this clueless fool Graeme Wood?”
In the sense of a blanket acceptance of all a person says, no, I am a skeptic, I take each statement on a case by case basis. I am loyal to no individual in the sense that I would somehow give a blanket endorsement of all statements made by that individual.
Whatever you may think of Graeme Wood he wrote an article in a mainstream publication that featured the “controversial” statement that ISIS is very Islamic.
That fact is pedestrian and obvious to you and me but in our topsy turvy world of “nothing to do with Islam” that is actually a “controversial” statement, which was supported at length in that article in the Atlantic.
“If so you’ve lost very badly, TWICE, in just the last five minutes, on this single thread. Maybe Stardusty you need to figure out up from down.”
Down is toward the center of the Earth, up is away from the center of the Earth, but that is an admittedly localized geocentric view so you might have a more universal reference frame.
john spielman says
just watch the major news networks ! with the exception of Hannity on FOX NEWS,
they are all SHARIA COMPLIANT!
I was especially shocked at the stance that Bill O’Reilly took in the pro free speech cartoon fest in Texas that resulted in an islamic attack!
The problem with the west is that because of the loss of our Judeo Christian foundation, most people cannot recognize the true evil of our time- islam
Champ says
On July 4th “Strident Pissant” was thanking Robert and telling him to “keep us the good work”, and now this about face — again.
And by my count, ‘sp’ has made at least 20 enemies, on JW, and 0 friends. But if anyone HAS defended him then I missed it, so perhaps he has at least 1 friend here. Hmm.
Linde Barrera says
To Champ- Hello and good morning. I find Stardusty Psyche has a colorful way with words, especially when he responds to, and questions commenters, like he’s a lawyer, and he can be funny, at least in my book. But some of his posts have confused me, and part of my problem is that I have a lack of knowledge about certain topics. But lying? No, I do not accept any person who lies. If there is one good thing about me, it is that I never lie. The Palestinian thing still confuses me, however. Walid Shoebat (Forum for Middle East Understanding) stated that “One day we were Jordanians, the next we were Palestinians.” It took him years to understand what was actually happening. He was also a Muslim who received Jesus Christ, and now helps rescue Christians in Syria and Pakistan. I also believe in the right of Israel to exist, and the land of Israel was bought from absentee Muslim landlords. In April of this year I called the Washington DC number on one of the photos accompanying the article to see if it was CAIR. It was, and I got Ibrahim Hooper himself! I remember to the best of my recall that I said in the USA we have separation of church and state and there shouldn’t be religious activity in any public school. (This was the “Covered Girl Challenge”.) And he said “We aren’t doing anything unconstitutional, and don’t listen to the haters.” And I, never hearing that term before, said “What is that?” So he gave me the dope on what it meant in terms of the Muslim world. And then I said, “Truth is truth.” So he hung up on me! To conclude, I post under my real, legal name. I am not afraid, I won’t be intimidated, but there are things I don’t know. And certain people, not pointing to Stardusty Psyche, but some individuals know how to take advantage of the ignorance of others. Thanks to this website, my ignorance is less than it was, but my knowledge is nowhere near the knowledge of many others here. Take care Champ. (Love your moniker.)
Champ says
Linde wrote:
Hello and good morning. I find Stardusty Psyche has a colorful way with words, especially when he responds to, and questions commenters, like he’s a lawyer, and he can be funny, at least in my book.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi, Linde. Well, I don’t find ‘sp’ the least bit “funny” …he’s sarcastic, at best, and an annoying pest. And thank you, Champion is my maiden name, so Champ is a fun nic. Take care, dear friend! 🙂
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Champ,
“On July 4th “Strident Pissant” was thanking Robert and telling him to “keep us the good work”, and now this about face — again.”
False dichotomy.
I do not have to be either 100% in agreement or 100% in opposition to the views expressed by an individual.
I choose a third option…I call ’em like I see ’em on a case by case, statement by statement basis and in my view Robert Spencer is doing fine work and is mostly right most of the time. No man is immune from criticism, as I can personally attest to here 🙂
Angemon says
I always get a chuckle out of this kind of blood libel. Check the “palestinian” demographics – for a population allegedly being slaughtered, they’re thriving.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
Yes, if by “thriving” you mean “living in apartheid bantustans separated by police state checkpoints” you have a good point.
duh_swami says
There is no apartheid…and you know reasons for the checkpoints…Most countries have border checkpoints. If the ‘Palestinians’ were capable of acting civilized, police state type checkpoints would not be necessary…
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Swami,
Here is a map of Israeli operated apartheid bandtustans, the police state checkpoints they use outside of Israel (not on their borders), and the lands Israel has stolen.
https://www.ochaopt.org/documents/westbank_2014_final.pdf
voegelinian says
Ah, we see the truer colors of Stardusty, with his use of propaganda terms like “apartheid” and “stolen” land with reference to the only free and progressive polity in the Middle East, Israel which, nonetheless, must behave in certain ways for its own self-defense against a people whose culture tends to predispose them to fanatically scripted, genocidal hatred against Jews.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi voegelinian
” There is no apartheid…”
Here it is
https://www.ochaopt.org/documents/westbank_2014_final.pdf
“and you know reasons for the checkpoints”
Yes, to enforce apartheid and facilitate the ongoing land grab as Likud makes its way to its founding goal of stealing all land from the Sea to the Jordan.
“apartheid” and “stolen” land with reference to the only free and progressive polity in the Middle East, ”
Funny, I never took you for a naive dolt up to this point. Are you really so simplistic as to think a nation cannot be free inside its borders with respect to its citizens and also practice government directed atrocities outside its borders?
Joseph says
Has anyone noticed the label of the map S.P. gave reference to????
https://www.ochaopt.org/documents/westbank_2014_final.pdf
It is from the U.N. for starters and #2 it is labeled “occupied Palestinian territory”
Palestinians are squatters, they have no territory. To say such a thing gives justification of a Palestinian state.
voegelinian says
“apartheid” and “stolen” land with reference to the only free and progressive polity in the Middle East, ”
Funny, I never took you for a naive dolt up to this point. Are you really so simplistic as to think a nation cannot be free inside its borders with respect to its citizens and also practice government directed atrocities outside its borders? — Stardusty Psyche
StardusyPsyche’s assignment is to read the first 25 long essays by Hugh Fitzgerald on the Israel-“Palestinian” issue, found on the first three pages of the Google search linked below, show comprehension by paraphrasing the arguments of all 25, then present actual counter-arguments (as opposed to the tissue of sophistry he has been trained to churn out). Of course, I’m not such a naive dolt as to expect StardustyPsyche to actually do any of this. It’s a rhetorical exercise of double exposure — of the truth, and of the lies of StardustyPsyche’s Father.
http://tiny.cc/s2ee0x
voegelinian says
I checked out the first essay one finds from my link (back into the mists of time of 2007), and noted to my delight that Hugh Fitzgerald became quite active in the comments section as well, deftly parrying the blunt penstrokes of a bête noire of yore on Jihad Watch, one “Roobartsbunsar”, who now that I come to think of it reminds me a bit of our Stardusty Psyche (SP). One of the many divagations Hugh indulged for the reader’s profit, that of “constructed” realities, including identities, may in retrospect be quite prescient. About this fellow, an old Jihad Watch reader I no longer see anymore, one “carpediadem” wrote something not only searingly apt for that personage, but also fitting to a t for SP:
“You are being deliberately obtuse and provocative, which generally comes from pushing a line and ignoring responses to it. But hey, if that’s your thing, go ahead. Just don’t expect anyone to be impressed by it.”
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
““You are being deliberately obtuse and provocative, which generally comes from pushing a line and ignoring responses to it. But hey, if that’s your thing, go ahead. Just don’t expect anyone to be impressed by it.””
Hi voeg.
Regarding your “deport all muslims” idea – where would you have a Native American convert to islam deported to? I’ve asked you that question many times, and you keep ignoring it…
(Needless to say, I’m not impressed by it)
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
“Regarding your (Vogie’s) “deport all muslims” idea – where would you have a Native American convert to islam deported to? ”
Siberia? Kenya? Just depends how much prehistory one wishes to rewind.
Angemon says
Stardusty Psyche posted:
“Siberia? Kenya? Just depends how much prehistory one wishes to rewind.”
Huh, SP, I know you have a very short attention span and a limited vocabulary, but notice what I said: American Native, meaning his nationality is American – a US citizen without any other citizenships. Now go look up what “deportation” means, and maybe you’ll understand the reasons for your F-.
voegelinian says
Ah, it didn’t take long for the Leftism of Stardusty Psyche to intersect with the asymptotic anxiety of Angemon, in their mutual agreement to protect the “native born” Muslim, and in their illiterate incomprehension of the fact that the state of being Mohammedan — whether born into it or converting to it — is fundamentally a declaration of seditious war on that Mohammedan’s native, non-Islamic polity. I.e., the Mohammedan, as long as he remains such, has, in the context of declaring war against all nations and peoples of the free world, already stripped himself of the citizenship and autochthony with which the Useful Idiots persist in endowing him.
Of course, it’s no surprise that StardustyPsyche balks at this; but that a long-time Internautic activist of the Counter-Jihad like Angemon agrees with this, aggrieves. And even worse is that the Counter-Jihad community (such as it is) at Jihad Watch comments either doesn’t seem to give a shit about this important problem, or when they do deign to lift their little fingers to notice, choose to chide me, rather than Angemon (or his egregiously anxious compadre-in-protecting-Muslims-from-bigotry, Phillip Jihadski).
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“Ah, it didn’t take long for the Leftism of Stardusty Psyche to intersect with the asymptotic anxiety of Angemon, in their mutual agreement to protect the “native born” Muslim”
There is no agreement, mutual or not, here. In fact, if anyone here ever agreed with SP it was you, when you accused people here of sycophancy.
What we have here is more of your propaganda – it’s (finally) starting to dawn on you that SP is not a particularly well-regarded individual here, and you’re just lying to conflate me with him – do show where I said to “protect native born muslims”, or retract your words.
“the fact that the state of being Mohammedan — whether born into it or converting to it — is fundamentally a declaration of seditious war on that Mohammedan’s native, non-Islamic polity. I.e., the Mohammedan, as long as he remains such, has, in the context of declaring war against all nations and peoples of the free world”
Oh, you want to talk about facts? I mean, real facts, not the absurdities you try to pass as such. Fine. Fact: no test of knowledge is required when converting to islam, therefore there’s no telling from one’s self-identification as “muslim” how much they know about islam, nor how closely they adhere to it.
That you need to be explained something so glaringly obvious doesn’t bode well for you.
“but that a long-time Internautic activist of the Counter-Jihad like Angemon agrees with this”
Exactly what am I supposed to be agreeing with? I asked you a question. You’re not answering it, you’re just trying to throw mud, hoping that something sticks.
“And even worse is that the Counter-Jihad community (such as it is) at Jihad Watch comments either doesn’t seem to give a shit about this important problem, or when they do deign to lift their little fingers to notice, choose to chide me, rather than Angemon (or his egregiously anxious compadre-in-protecting-Muslims-from-bigotry, Phillip Jihadski).”
I’m going to go on a limb here and say that whatever “chiding” you got was rightfully deserved – you prefer to lie and demonize critics, such as myself and PJ, rather than answering criticism with cogent, well-though logic.
Now, regarding your “deport all muslims” idea – where would you have a Native American convert to islam deported to? I’ve asked you that question many times, and you keep ignoring it…
(Needless to say, I’m not impressed by it, and I suspect neither are the people you’re trying to get on your side for the sake of being on your side, even though you’re proven you have no qualms to lie, insult and demonize those who have taken your side)
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
Am-: I said: American Native,”
…
Angemon says
July 9, 2015 at 4:24 pm
Regarding your “deport all muslims” idea – where would you have a Native American convert to islam deported to?
…
So, you did not say “American Native”. You said “Native American”.
In ordinary American conversational English “Native American” is a term used to denote a descendent of people present in America before the arrival of Christopher Columbus.
Siberia and Kenya were just my simplified placeholders for the ancestral places of origin for the Native Americans you spoke of. When we deport people we typically send them back to their place of origin.
Sigh….
A joke loses its punch when it must be explained to an audience that does not get the references.
Phil says
Stardusty,
If what you say is so, it’s odd that more and more “Palestinians” in East Jerusalem are seeking and being granted Israeli citizenship, isn’t it?
And that there are Israeli Arabs in the Knesset (almost none of whom are in any way loyal to Israel as a state – as demonstrated by their public pronouncements).
And that Arabs in Israel proper can follow any profession, buy and keep private property, access social welfare and the health services – unlike Lebanon where there is a list 80 professions unavailable to the “Palestinians”, where they are not citizens and may access neither welfare nor the public health service and are forbidden owning private property. (let us politely ignore similar and only marginally less stringent restrictions in Jordan, Syria and Egypt).
And there are Arabs sitting on the Israeli Supreme Court. How many Yehudi would even be allowed to vote in Arab lands?
The truth is plain – Arabs living in Israel-proper have full civic rights. A whole lot more of them than are actually granted Arabs living in the surrounding Arab lands.
The only people who practice apartheid in the middle east are the Arabs – who rendered their land Judenrein decades ago. (Not to mention getting rid of Egypt’s Greeks and Armenians….)
And please don’t pretend I’m an ignorant Kaffir – I grew up in Zamalek. I well remember prior to 1967 when we never referred to “Palestinians” – only Arabs displaced by the evil Jews.
You have no interest in the soi-disant “Palestinians”. If you did, you’d be concerned about the three deaths of “Palestinian” prisoners in “Palestinian” jails this week – two in the West Bank, one in Gaza….but why would you? You can’t (yet) bash the Jews about it.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Phil,
“If what you say is so, it’s odd that more and more “Palestinians” in East Jerusalem are seeking and being granted Israeli citizenship, isn’t it?”
No, would you rather live in an open air prison or the free nation that maintains that prison?
“And that there are Israeli Arabs in the Knesset ”
No, inside Israel there is democratic Western style freedom. Israel operates apartheid Bantustans separated by police state checkpoints outside of Israel.
“Arabs living in Israel-proper have full civic rights”
Yes, and Arabs living outside of Israel-proper are under apartheid police state restrictions and blockade.
“The only people who practice apartheid in the middle east are the Arabs”
No, Israel practices apartheid outside of Israel-proper.
“.but why would you? You can’t (yet) bash the Jews about it.”
I call ’em like I see ’em
In terms of territorial ambitions Likud and Hamas were founded on the same principles.
The Jewish texts are even more genocidal than the Islamic texts.
Modern Jewish methods are to steal the land between the Sea and the Jordan at minimal cost in lives on both sides. Modern Islamic methods are to steal all the land between the Sea and the Jordan and also murder every single Jew.
So there you do have a significant difference.
Angemon says
Stardusty Psyche posted:
“Yes, if by “thriving” you mean “living in apartheid bantustans separated by police state checkpoints””
I mean thriving as in booming (in more than one way), growing or flourishing – you know, the actual meaning of “thriving” in current English, not whatever pallywood propaganda gobemouches like you gobble up hook, line and sinker.
You don’t have a problem with current English, do you?
Like I said, check the “palestinian” demographics – for a population allegedly being slaughtered, they’re thriving.
miriamrove says
@stardusty: In case if do not know, Muslims best respond to brute force and check points. That is how one can tame the spread if the cancer. Islam that is. m
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
“I mean thriving as in booming”
Yes, every time Israel drops a bomb they go boom.
Every time they blow themselves up they go boom.
Things are booming in Palestine indeed.
Angemon says
Stardusty Psyche posted:
“Yes, every time Israel drops a bomb they go boom.
Every time they blow themselves up they go boom.”
Last time I checked, Israel *warned* and told civilians to move out before dropping bombs. Israeli forces also routinely *cancel* missions when they see civilians on the target. And, of course, Israel wouldn’t have to drop any bombs if the so-called “palestinians” didn’t launch rockets against Israel. Which they routinely do since they’re Jew-hating people who elected a Jew-hating government based on their hatred of Jews.
Fact of the matter is, look at “palestinian” demographics. For someone allegedly being slaughtered, they’re actually increasing in number – unlike, for example, Jews and Christians in muslim countries.
voegelinian says
Stardusty wrote:
“Yes, every time Israel drops a bomb they go boom.
Every time they blow themselves up they go boom.
Things are booming in Palestine indeed.”
The fault for this state of affairs is 100% Muslim, 0% Israeli.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
“Last time I checked, Israel *warned* and told civilians to move out before dropping bombs”
True, but unfortunately a couple thousand died in the last incursion into Gaza nevertheless. That is actually a relatively small number compared to the average ethnic cleansing indigenous people displacement land grab, and also small relative to the military capabilities of Israel. But not small for those couple thousand individuals.
“For someone allegedly being slaughtered,”
Not my allegation, at least in terms of any alleged genocide or generalized area killing, Israel is killing the minimum number necessary to accomplish its land theft goals. So, perhaps there is some honor among thieves after all.
Angemon says
Stardusty Psyche
“True, but unfortunately a couple thousand died in the last incursion into Gaza nevertheless.”
There would have been no so-called “incursion” if the “palestinians” weren’t adamant in attacking Israel, would it? Do you know why Israel returned to Gaza? It’s because, after withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, dismantling all settlements, the “palestinians” didn’t keep their part of the bargain. There was no peace, just the continuation of their religiously inspired anti-semite policy that would have all of those in Israel killed.
Also, if those numbers came from the PA, expect them to be false.
“ That is actually a relatively small number compared to the average ethnic cleansing indigenous people displacement land grab”
I see you’re relentless in your slander against Israel and sanctification of the so-called “indigenous people”. There’s no ethnic cleansing going on – like I said, a look at “palestinian” demographics shows that they’re thriving. Unless you want to classify increase in numbers as “ethnic cleansing”. There is also no land grab.
“Not my allegation, at least in terms of any alleged genocide or generalized area killing”
So it’s a “genocide” now, eh? Pro-tip, SP – words have meanings. If you don’t know the meaning of a word don’t use it.
“ Israel is killing the minimum number necessary to accomplish its land theft goals.”
More anti-semite slander who flies in the face of facts. The Israelis have given up land for peace. They withdrew from the Gaza strip in 2005, dismantling settlements in the process. If they’re land thieves, they must be the most ineffectual in existence – I’d say that giving something is the opposite of stealing it.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
SP-“True, but unfortunately a couple thousand died in the last incursion into Gaza nevertheless.”
Am-“There would have been no so-called “incursion” if the “palestinians” weren’t adamant in attacking Israel, would it? Do you know why Israel returned to Gaza? It’s because, after withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, dismantling all settlements, the “palestinians” didn’t keep their part of the bargain. There was no peace, just the continuation of their religiously inspired anti-semite policy that would have all of those in Israel killed.”
OK, in your view these events justify Israeli actions you so are in general agreement with Obama about that justification…I knew we could find some common ground eventually!
SP-“ That is actually a relatively small number compared to the average ethnic cleansing indigenous people displacement land grab”
Am-“I see you’re relentless in your slander against Israel and sanctification of the so-called “indigenous people”. There’s no ethnic cleansing going on”
False. Israel has been chasing people off their land, out of their houses, and refusing return to the property they own since the state was declared.
Keys are known as a symbol of this gross injustice and policy of ethnic cleansing perpetrated by Israel because they symbolize the keys many refugees still have to the property in Israel stolen by Israel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_of_return
Am. There is also no land grab.”
False. It was and is Israeli government practice to steal and keep land. A prime founding goal of Likud is to steal it all from the Sea to the Jordan.
(see above for lands stolen inside Israel and below for lands stolen outside Israel)
https://www.ochaopt.org/documents/westbank_2014_final.pdf
SP-“Not my allegation, at least in terms of any alleged genocide or generalized area killing”
Am”So it’s a “genocide” now, eh? Pro-tip, SP – words have meanings. If you don’t know the meaning of a word don’t use it.”
Pro-tip Angemon, read carefully before flipping out on words your target did not say. I said it was not my allegation, others may allege genocide but I do not. I allege land theft and minimal loss of life ethnic cleansing.
SP-“ Israel is killing the minimum number necessary to accomplish its land theft goals.”
Am-“More anti-semite slander”
Ohh there you go. You just could not keep it even marginally together any longer. How stupid,
Guess what, not everybody sees things in black and white. I can be pro Israel and opposed to certain Israeli actions at the same time, just as I am with the USA. Do you agree with every government policy and if not does that make you anti-American (if you are American, I don’t recall you saying).?
If you oppose a national policy does that make you racist against the primary race or ethnicity of the nation, or bigoted against members of that nation’s primary religious group?
Your charge of antisemitism is asinine.
Am-:” who flies in the face of facts. The Israelis have given up land for peace. They withdrew from the Gaza strip in 2005, dismantling settlements in the process. If they’re land thieves, they must be the most ineffectual in existence – I’d say that giving something is the opposite of stealing it.”
The founding goal of Likud to steal all the land between the Sea and the Jordan has a variety of tactical and strategic difficulties for Israel. For one, there just is not a huge population of people in Israel who can support this goal. It takes a lot of effort to steal large pieces of land so Israel has been forced by the small size of its base population to take an incremental approach.
Also, they have to be careful not to steal too much too fast lest it arouse too much international uproar that could jeopardize US support. Israel can ignore a steady stream of international condemnations as long as the big dog is her protector.
Israel did indeed give up its settlements in Gaza, for now. They simply became too costly for relatively little gain. Israel could steal more land more quickly at less cost by concentrating on what they call Samaria and Judea.
Angemon says
Stardusty Psyche posted:
“OK, in your view these events justify Israeli actions”
Doesn’t it in yours? Are the Israelis supposed to get attacked over and over by people clamoring for its total destruction (for religious reasons) without fighting back?
“False. Israel has been chasing people off their land, out of their houses, and refusing return to the property they own since the state was declared.”
While some expulsions might have taken place during the heat of war (the first), the bulk of the land was bought from arabs, and arabs have left Israel voluntarily upon its foundation when they believed the propaganda from their arab neighbours – that Israel would be destroyed and the Jews would be driven to the sea (and presumably drown). The arabs who remained in Israel became Israeli citizens, with all the benefits it entails. The Jews expelled from arab countries for being Jews went to Israel and were assimilated into the Israeli state. Meanwhile, the arab nations who took in the arabs who chose to wait for the destruction of the Jews and Israel deny them citizenship and rights. So there are millions of “palestinians” bred, born and raised in arab nations who are, for all purposes, second-class foreigners.
“False. It was and is Israeli government practice to steal and keep land.”
And you say that, presumably with a straight face, despite Israel giving land for peace (and being cheated in the process because the Jew-hating muslims will have nothing else than full destruction of Israel)?
“others may allege genocide but I do not”
So you agree that there’s no genocide going on in Gaza? Nor ethnic cleansing?
“Guess what, not everybody sees things in black and white. I can be pro Israel ”
Which, so far, you have never proved to be. Unless I’m mistaken, you’ve never even provided the minimal amount of lip service to try to pretend to.
“Your charge of antisemitism is asinine.”
No, it’s spot-on. You keep regurgitating, and agreeing with, the same bogus charges brought up by the people who hate Jews and who want Jews to die for no other reason than being Jews – anti-semitism. Like, for example:
“The founding goal of Likud to steal all the land between the Sea and the Jordan”
You know, Egypt and Jordan have, in the past, occupied the Gaza strip. And the islamic state has claimed that they’ll drive Hamas out and occupy the Gaza strip. “Palestinians” didn’t care, the international community didn’t care. It’s only when Israel takes control of land used for attacks against it that the outrage begins. How dare the Jews try to defend themselves?!?!?!
“Israel did indeed give up its settlements in Gaza, for now. They simply became too costly for relatively little gain.”
Right, much better to get rockets thrown at you than occupying a piece of land and prevent it… You know what happened? While Israel held Gaza, Jews build greenhouses that produced an abundance of vegetables. Just on that industry alone, the Jews, making up less that 1/100th of the Gaza population, were responsible for 20% of its gross domestic product. When they left, a problem arose: what to do with the greenhouses? Mortimer Zuckerman, the publisher of U.S. News and World Report, raised $14 million to buy the greenhouses from their Jewish owners and give them to the “palestinians”. It was a gesture of peace, an effort to encourage the “palestinians” to look on the withdrawal from Gaza as a step in the process of ending the fifty year war of the Arab states and the “palestinian” Arabs against Israel. Their response to this peace offering was unambiguous and swift. As soon as the Israeli troops left, “palestinians” rushed in to loot the greenhouses that had been given to them, stripping them of the pumps, hoses and other equipment that had made them so productive.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Angemon,
SP-“OK, in your view these events justify Israeli actions”
Am-“Doesn’t it in yours?”
Yes, I just thought it was a little interesting that you agree with Obama and I on this point. No nation will sit back and be rocketed and infiltrated. Hamas, besides having been founded on a genocidal, homicidal, suicidal, apocalyptic ethnic cleansing land theft platform, is also tactically not so bright sometimes…giving Israel yet another golden justification to mow the grass.
SP-others may allege genocide but I do not”
Am-“So you agree that there’s no genocide going on in Gaza? Nor ethnic cleansing?”
Yes, if Israel wanted to wipe out the people of Gaza they could, but they don’t. They have already displaced (cleansed based on ethnicity) hundreds of thousands from within the borders of Israel and for the time being are concentrating on stealing land in what they call Samaria and Judea. Operating Gaza as a prison camp best suits Israel as lead by Likud for the time being.
SP“Your charge of antisemitism is asinine.”
Am-“No, it’s spot-on. You keep regurgitating, and agreeing with, the same bogus charges brought up by the people who hate Jews”
What a stupid logical fallacy.
I agree with certain of the opinions of people who hate Jews therefor I hate Jews? What a pathetic attempt to justify your asinine charge of antisemitism against me.
Learn a little logic before you open your big stupid mouth about me being an antisemite.
If you want to play the racist card bring some hard evidence, not some pathetically fallacious “argument”
There are a lot of Jews outside and even inside Israel who are against the settlements in the West Bank, or Judea/Samaria. This is a highly debatable subject that has nothing necessarily to do with Jew hating, dipshit.
People who hate Jews very likely are against Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but being against Israeli settlements in the West bank and holding a whole variety of opinions against Israeli government policy does not demonstrate antisemitism, racism, Jew hating, or anything of the sort.
Learn some basic reasoning skills before you you open your big mouth.
And learn something about the founding principles of Likud while you are getting your head out of your ass. They want all the land from the Sea to the Jordan, period, and that is just exactly what they are perpetrating continually.
If saying that makes you think I am antisemitic you can put it where the sun don’t shine, because a lot of self loving Jews agree with me about Israeli government policy and if you want their names you can start with the prolific Noam Chomsky.
Angemon says
Stardusty Psyche posted:
“I agree with certain of the opinions of people who hate Jews therefor I hate Jews?”
Nope. SP, you’ve proven in the past (and you keep proving, now that I think about it) that you have limited resources when it comes to reading and comprehending, so let me repeat what I said, since you apparently misunderstood it, despite reading it, selecting it, copying it and pasting it:
Not “opinions”, bogus charges. You’re repeating lies created by Jews-hating (anti-semites) people to demonize Israel and Jews. Since you keep regurgitating lies concocted by anti-semite people, you’re engaging in anti-semitism. Ergo, nothing wrong in pointing out you’re an anti-semite.
“dipshit”
And there goes the “I’m trying to raise the level of debate and I won’t engage in personal insults” persona you feverishly try to pass… That tends to happen with muslims: they always – always – flip out when someone disputes their anti-semite drivel regarding Israel. Temper, temper…
You know, Egypt and Jordan have, in the past, occupied the Gaza strip. And the islamic state has claimed that they’ll drive Hamas out and occupy the Gaza strip. “Palestinians” didn’t care, the international community didn’t care. It’s only when Israel takes control of land used for attacks against it that the outrage begins. How dare the Jews try to defend themselves?!?!?!
While Israel held Gaza, Jews build greenhouses that produced an abundance of vegetables. Just on that industry alone, the Jews, making up less that 1/100th of the Gaza population, were responsible for 20% of its gross domestic product. When they left, a problem arose: what to do with the greenhouses? Mortimer Zuckerman, the publisher of U.S. News and World Report, raised $14 million to buy the greenhouses from their Jewish owners and give them to the “palestinians”. It was a gesture of peace, an effort to encourage the “palestinians” to look on the withdrawal from Gaza as a step in the process of ending the fifty year war of the Arab states and the “palestinian” Arabs against Israel. Their response to this peace offering was unambiguous and swift. As soon as the Israeli troops left, “palestinians” rushed in to loot the greenhouses that had been given to them, stripping them of the pumps, hoses and other equipment that had made them so productive. 20% of their GDP down the drain because they hate Jews with a passion.
“They want all the land from the Sea to the Jordan, period, and that is just exactly what they are perpetrating continually.”
Once again, your anti-semite drivel flies in the face of facts. The first government to trade land for peace was a Likud government during the 1979 Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty. After the Oslo Accords in 1996, Likud, under Netanyahu’s leadership (and he’s a real leader – Obama could stand to learn a lot from him, if he could stand to learn anything from anyone) has been giving land to the “palestinians” in exchange for security guarantees, even though the “palestinians” never keep their part of the bargain, because they want Israel gone and all the Jews dead.
Also, a Likud-led government agreed for the first time to turn over land in the West Bank (the heart of Biblical Israel) to the Palestinian Authority. But, according to you, the mean JOOOSSSS are trying to steal all the land and ethnically cleanse the “palestinians” (even though, like I stated before, a look at demographics says otherwise), who are unwanted even by other arabs (and with good reason – Black September, anyone?).
Champ says
‘sp’ wrote to Angemon:
Hi Angemon,
“I mean thriving as in booming”
Yes, every time Israel drops a bomb they go boom.
Every time they blow themselves up they go boom.
Things are booming in Palestine indeed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What a STUPID answer. Further proof that this ‘sp’ Clown is not here for honest debate …
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Champ,
Gee, I’m sorry you are unable to get my sardonic take on events in Gaza…
But, anyhow, howzabout I ask you a serious question?
Have you heard about the Obama peace plan for jihadi leaders? There’s a peace of him over here, a peace of him over there…
kay says
We know in concrete terms from his response that the Saudi multi-billionaire is an evil bad guy blaming the victims. The 9/11 was a major attack on one of the major cities of the entire planet and an attack on the US Pentagon.
It was an attack against the citizenry and the military of the ENTIRE United States, and the Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal blames the US and NOT al-Qaeda.
This was an unannounced act of war and contrary to the Geneva Convention.
Since Alwaleed bin Talal is CLEARLY a DIRECT supporter of al-Qaeda, and an OPPONENT of New York City AND the US Pentagon, his money should NOT be taken by any US citizen who values their country.
That is enemy money and that money will be used to neutralize or wipe out much of the opposition to Wahabi cultural jihad. I have a very bad felling about this.
It will be necessary to emphasize to everyone that this money is all cultural jihad money and a direct extreme threat to the principles of the open society and in fact the future of civilization.
Why? This Wahabi big money WILL be used to buy influence for Sharia and to muffle opposition to Sharia in the universities and in the media.
I knew this was happening in the United Kingdom. But this is now on an Enormous scale. It will be very hard to fight this level of resource allocation.
We are in big big trouble.
Cultural jihad now has a whole D Day Invasion being set up against us. It is quite possible to lose a lot of turf in the upcoming culture wars, especially here in the US.
There are a number of factors working for the good guys, but opposing this enemy money will require an entirely new level of effort to ramp up outreach.
I have no idea how to oppose a couple billion dollars in enemy Wahabi money. Even a much smaller amount like $100M would be hard to fight.
The Islamists have tremendous resources in many respects, and they can buy and build lots of turf in this country with a lot less than a couple billion dollars.
Money is what makes politics run. Money also buys a lot of soft power via media advertising.
Money can be used to set up Wahabi collaborationist academic programs that work against the basic principles of academic integrity and the core principles of free speech and freedom of thought. U Cal Berkeley is already looking really bad, since Berkeley is starting a cultural jihad/ anti-free speech program on “Islamophobia”. So we are told.
What we have to do, among other things, is massively humiliate UC Berkeley’s Islamophobia program in front of the broader public.
Any university that takes Saudi Wahabi money is collaborationist. .
We need to trace where this Saudi Wahabi money goes. That is a highest priority. And we need to let everyone know that the evil Wahabi bad guys, the friends of al-Qaeda, are openly operating in our key infrastructure.
And we have to punish collaborators by exposing them to public scrutiny for being traitors to this country and supporters of a foreign fascist system of religious law which seeks to destroy this country. It is never acceptable to destroy society nor to destroy civilization.
Al-Qaeda, Islamic State, Wahabi politics and all their supporters are the enemies of peace and freedom and civilization. That includes all their financial supporters and all the stateside collaborators.
Alwaleed bin Talal is evil and anyone who works with him in the US is in effect a traitor to the United States.
underbed cat says
This makes the Percy Sutton interview with NY1, all the more credible and interesting. With the wall of money and influence coming from the Saudi Prince, and his muslim outreach to the churches in the U.S. for ‘cultural understanding” and charitable donations…it washes away any critical understanding, already I have notice very little reporting about Syria, etc, conditions in Israel, at the same time our military announces a huge drop in the military. yes this could easily open the gate to Sharia compliance. I certainly hope that money is refused or tracked…
Ian_A_S says
Ths story exemplifies why I read JW, because as sure as hell this story – of massive significance – won’t be repeated in the mainstream press.
underbed cat says
One other comment on the ‘charitable donations” of the Saudi Prince….my thought the first time I saw this information, was about Greece. He could really buy up the country or donate so much money, which is also influence, he could add that land to his caliphate, like a silent jihad ( which has nothing to do with Islam).
Ayatrollah says
At least the spending will create jobs. Funny, the news reports don’t mention the “Islam” part.
Jaladhi says
All this shows is that the US media and university academia are morally bankrupt and corrupt. This is equivalent to prostituting themselves for Islam. But they call it political correctness and moral superiority! These are the Benedict Arnolds of the present time!!
mortimer says
J wrote: “they call it political correctness”
Agree. PC is the problem. It comes from cultural Marxism.
mortimer says
It’s time to stop transferring our wealth the Gulf states. We need to use alternate fuels.
We are giving barbarians like Alwaleed the means if not to take over the world, at least to cause much damage to our freedoms.
Sell-outs like John Esposito should remember “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”
Linde Barrera says
To mortimer- You mentioned that we need to get alternative fuels, so as to wean ourselves away from Saudi oil. I would like that too, for several reasons. (Even though Canada, Russia, Venezuela and I’m sure a few other countries also produce oil, but nothing like Saudi Arabia.) So it came as a surprise when I read my emails today and one was from from Personal Liberty, edited by Bob Livingston. There was a lengthy but informative article about how scientists are developing gasoline for cars from natural gas, and as Pres. Obama said several years ago: “We are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.” The article also stated that 2 German scientists many years ago began experiments trying to turn coal (because Germany had lots of coal) into gasoline for cars. So scientists have been exploring this idea ever since. And the reason for the news article was to inspire investors. So I sure hope the scientists who are working on this will be successful and soon we can be singing at the pump “Ding dong the witch is dead, which old witch, the Saudi witch.” There are several people I know personally who want to sing that song too, because they hate the US dependence on oil from Saudi Arabia. Mortimer, I find your texts to be clear, truthful, witty succinct, and thought provoking. Keep it up, and thank you. (From an adoring fan—me!)
duh_swami says
I’m sorry yer grace, I’m not going to submit no matter how much money you pay me.
Jack Diamond says
Abdullah Omar Naseef was chief of the Muslim World League and founder of Rabita Trust, financier of al Qaeda, a designated a Global Terrorist Entity which was directed by an al Qaeda founder, Wael Hamza Julaidan. Naseef’s connection to Alwaleed is damning. Naseef also financed the institution run by the family of Huma Abedin, the IMMA (Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs), a MB mouthpiece. Small world.
The Al-Rasala TV station mentioned (run by a Holy Land Foundation co-conspirator) is part of Alwaleed’s Arab media group, Rotana, of which Rupert Murdoch is part owner (18.97%) just as Alwaleed owns 7% of News Corp (and therefore Fox).
Diana West wrote about Prince Alwaleed’s change in tactics and methods:
“in 2002, however, Alwaleed seems to have had something of an epiphany. Arab countries can influence U.S. decison-making “if they unite through economic interests, not political,” … soon, the Saudi billionaire was spending his money quite differently — no more Palestinian grandstanding, no more Saudi telethons, no more CAIR. In 2005, Alwaleed purchased a 5.5 percent stake of voting stock in the Murdoch-owned News Corp (he now owns 7 percent). He also spent $40 million to enlarge Islamic studies on leading American campuses, donating $20 million to Harvard to create a university-wide Islamic studies program, which also boosted Islamic law (sharia) studies on campus, and $20 million to Georgetown to set up the Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding under Islamic apologist John Esposito. “The News Corp. investment began paying off right away. Also in 2005, with Muslims rioting in Paris in the worst street violence since 1968, Alwaleed telephoned Rupert Murdoch, as Alwaleed himself told an audience in Dubai, and said “these are not Muslim riots, they are riots.” Presto, the Fox News crawl about “Muslim riots in Paris” across the bottom of the screen changed to “civil riots.”
“What becomes clear quickly is that Fox never, ever covers the amazing, shocking and terrifying stories that reflect the undermining incursions of sharia (Islamic law) into the West.
“We are living through a cultural transformation of epochal significance as one civilization (Western) yields with barely a peep to another (Islamic).
“Fox News covers terrorism, war, national security. It does not cover, let alone chronicle, the introduction of sharia — Islamic law — into the West. It does not cover the massive ongoing Islamic movement by which the Western world is being rapidly Islamized. It does not cover what the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad.” It does not cover the disappearance of Western culture in Europe.
“If I am correct and Alwaleed bought into News Corp to neutralize the jihad opposition, it’s one of the most brilliant influence operations ever. The Saudis would have managed to silence the one organization whose coverage of the news could have rallied opposition to Islamization.”
http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/interview-diana-west-saudi-influence-fox-news
Obvious who the real fox is. The smarmy Prince.
eib says
There is no charity in Islam. If Muslims did practice charity, their countries would not be so poor, their standard of living much better. Poor people hoard. The rich who are healthy in their psychology give for good, not evil.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
If Muslims did practice charity, their countries would not be so poor…
I am disturbed to see you disrespect the Inshallah, a primary characteristic of Moslems. It could be that they would give money to take care of their poor, in fact Allah commands it in the poor tax commands he makes in the Holy Ko-Ran. It’s just that they don’t have any money to give, and that’s probably because they just don’t give a shit, about business and productivity, that is. Inshallah.
Westman says
Farmer,
Your pig operation can also operate by the principle of Inshallah. The pigs get fed inshallah, they don’t need vacination because they won’t get sick, inshallah, no sense worrying because there will be a profit, inshallah. And if you go bankupt, well, inshallah. There is always the backup plan: take what you need from the kafir, inshallah.
stop pushing Islam on us says
You can be disturbed all you want. We don’t care. What’s disturbing is how people claim to be of a religion of peace while practicing a religion that promotes murder. How is that peaceful? How people are pushing for tolerance of Islam when Islam itself is not tolerant.
epistemology says
32 billion bucks for our freedom. I bet that’s more than than Iceland’s defence budget. Nobody can buy our freedom, he can shove his money up his ass or how about real charity? How about accommodating ISIS victims? You can’t buy the West Alwaleed, we’re proud of our freedom and want to keep it. We’ll never accept sharia.
shams78 says
Prince Alwaleed also previously owned a massive stake in News Corp., the corporation in America that owns Obama hating channel Fox News.
http://thinkprogress.org/media/2010/08/24/115285/fox-stewart-alwaleed/
So I don’t see why you people are complaining about this guy, he is one of you.
wildjew says
I believe the prince owns a 7% share in Fox News parent corporation. Many conservatives are troubled by it. I certainly am troubled by it / him. Some wonder how much influence Alwaleed exerts over Fox News in terms of its portrayal of Islam. I read where he contacted Rupert Murdoch on at least one occasion regarding Fox News’ reporting on riots by Muslim youth in France a few years back. Alwaleed did not like them reporting they were “Muslim” youth. Fox complied. Some Fox News anchors (Bill O’Reilly, Greta Van Susteren, Martha MacCallum) distanced themselves or outright condemned Pamela Geller for her free speech activism; her opposition to sharia blasphemy law which I am certain the prince supports imposing here in the West. I consider Bill O’Reilly an apologist for Barack Obama and Islam notwithstanding his criticism of both from time to time.
John Sobieski says
Just give the charity to Europe, the US, and other Western Countries who have been caring for Muslims abused by other Muslims.
Jaladhi says
Muslim charity is only meant for Muslims or for propagation of Islam by any means including terrorism. In no way this guy is going to give money to any Western charitable foundation such as that of Bill Gates or others which will result in helping all human beings. A no, no for Muslims – their Zakat is entirely for Muslims. This behavior one can see this in the poor response of rich Muslim countries when a dsiaster strikes a non-Muslim country. Hell they don’t even respond well to help Muslims ether – Saudi Arabia’s poor response to tsunami victims of Aceh district in Indonesia is a glaring example.
Tequila Not Taqiyya says
He got his money from selling us oil.
It is sick that we are funding both sides of the war on terror.
Time has long been past for us to find alternative energy sources so we can finally tell the Saudis where to go.
el-cid says
How does the United States (and the Western World) defend itself from this?
He can buy 80 of politicians, and probably 100 percent of those on the left.
Who is going to call him out and expose those who take the money?
Why do we allow mosques to be funded by foreign money?
Dorian says
Money is the root of all Evil. Saudi cash is the new Love. As the western politician said to the terrorist ‘Show me some love’. Our nations are for sale. If you are a Saudi that’s all anyone needs to know. The community organizer has arranged special fast track visas for the brothel bred Saudi Christian and Jew haters. This has to be the sickest self inflicted demise any empire has ever combined with willful ignorance to bring itself to an ignoble end. Am I imagining all this?
Champ says
Money is the root of all Evil.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The ‘love’ of money is the root of all evil …
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.” — 1 Timothy 6:10
Take care 🙂
el-cid says
Things are not as simple as they seem. I have researched this since my post (above).
This Prince thinks Obama is a fool and is destroying America.
He supports a biomedical centre at Cornell that is headed by a Jew.
He has female aides.
He acknowledges that Israel and Saudi Arabia have common interests vis-a-vis Iran.
Jack Diamond says
“He has female aides.” Yes, and he has female “stewardesses” too, for his fleet of private jet planes: http://www.alarabiya.com/2015/04/23/saudi-prince-offers-bentleys-to-bomber-pilots-but-no-ambulances-or-hospitals-they-devestated/
It’s true Alwaleed just recently sold off most of his interest in News Corp. as part of a portfolio review. The value of the stock has dropped since 2014, yes, but he stills owns 6.6% of 20th Century Fox and the sell off took place, coincidentally, as new charges came forward concerning Alwaleed:
“Allegations were made by Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker of 9/11, and provided in the form of a sworn statement to attorneys for families of 9/11 victims for their lawsuit against Saudi Arabia. He is serving a life sentence at a supermax prison in Florence, Colorado.
“Moussaoui’s sworn statement named Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal,“a leading Saudi businessman” as one of the financiers of al-Qaeda.’
http://canadafreepress.com/article/69573 Feb. 6, 2015
Which helps explain why the founder of Rabita Trust was part of Alwaleed’s network.
He likes Israel as much as he did when he ran a Saudi telethon that raised $100 million for families of “Palestinian”martyrs i.e. “suicide” bombers (he donated $27 million himself). He also explained why the boycott Israel movement was ineffective, because it failed to hurt the US economy:
‘He said that it was the Arabs who benefit more from extended economic relations with the US because “the trade balance between the Arabs and the US is in our favor.” He elaborated by explaining that US trade with the Arab World was no more than 3% of the American total trade volume. The Arabs should concentrate on influencing American public opinion, he said. He pointed to the fact that Israel succeeded in manipulating the events of September 11, to its advantage by branding all Arabs and Muslims as terrorists, then proceeded to war on the Palestinians and massacring them unchecked.”
Lachian Carmichael, “Arab Boycott Campaign Worries US Business,” Arab News, Vol. 27, No. 155 (May 1, 2002).
The same Prince who suggested U.S. policies provoked 9/11 (this, from one of its financiers).
Alwaleed is “progressive” the way a wolf in sheep’s clothing is progressive.
No, things are not so simple. Alwaleed belongs in a prison cell or worse if those charges are true,
not honored and feted and catered to, by kaffirs and “stewardesses” alike.
Holy Prophet APF says
Prince Alaweed is one influential dude. Every time I watch news entertainment superstar Bill O’Reilly lecture the masses that Moslems in America are normal people who want the same things we all do, I think of the Prince and his ownership position in News Corporation. Bill cares a lot about money, and he likes Moslems, which I’m sure is just a coincidence. Yeah sure, Bill’s a little miffed at the misinterpreters and perverters and all, but he knows that Islam is basically A-OK. And so is Prince Alaweed, whose name you never hear mentioned on the Fox RINO channel.
So this is a rock solid investment for the Prince. If Islam is misunderstood by Infidels in addition to the tiny minority great religion hijackers, he’s willing to invest in helping them correctly understand it.
Ed says
Our Petrodollar$ at work.
voegelinian says
“Alwaleed has already spent so much money, as this piece shows in part, that he could be a prime explanation for why the mainstream media marches in lockstep in favor of Sharia and whitewashing jihad”
This would be the Cupidity explanation (from Hugh Fitzgerald’s “Esdrujula” formula). Closer inspection reveals it is not a logical explanation. Imagine if there were an international white racist organization with trillions of dollars, and it approached various “Elites” in the media, business sector, academe, and politics with generous donations to the tune of millions if they would only march in lockstep with their vision of the future where black people can be lynched, driven out of their homes, rounded up and put in camps, enslaved, and/or deported back to Africa, and offering millions more so these various Elites would whitewash the whole phenomenon. Do you think these various Elites would comply?
I don’t either.
So mere Cupidity is not a sufficient explanation. There is a positive ideological component afoot here, in the form of a prevalent, fashionable, mainstream Weltanschauung. Among the features of this worldview is one that distorts in complex fashion the interpretations of the mountains of data that indicate a rosier picture picture of Islam and of Muslims systemically. Many other features suffice to explain why this is happening, in the service of an explanation that begins by assuming the West is a (relatively) healthy civilization and thus wouldn’t breed such widespread evil as so many in the Counter-Jihad so glibly seem to assume.
voegelinian says
An early Christmas…
“Know Thy Friend”, and the Esdrujula Elves (in time for Christmas)
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2013/12/know-thy-friend-and-esdrujula-elves-in.html
voegelinian says
“There is a positive ideological component afoot here, in the form of a prevalent, fashionable, mainstream Weltanschauung. ”
And this fashionable worldview that has most of the entire West in its pleasantly self-righteous thrall has a lot of good in it, which goes a long way to explain its broad appeal — that’s why it’s so prevalent (DUH! — unless you think the majority of your own West is evil, for crying out loud…).
RonaldB says
Vogelinian,
I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about here, other than that you don’t think that the politicians, news entertainers, and educators are whitewashing Islam just for the money. The rest of your message is totally garbled.
voegelinian says
RonaldB, you don’t know what a “positive ideological component” means? One that also has “a lot of good in it”? How is that garbled? Are you being unduly distracted by the locutions I used surrounding those perfectly understandable notions?
The PC MC worldview, which persists in defending and whitewashing Muslims, is not merely (nor even mostly) motivated by money (Cupidity), nor because all the Westerners who do it are unintelligent (Stupidity), nor because they are all afraid of Muslims (Timidity). Nor are they doing it because they are all Evil Leftists. How do we explain the mass myopia of the problem of Islam in the West, once we eliminate these silly explanations? And how do we do so in such a way that we are not presuming the worst about our fellow Western man?
That’s my point.
Stardusty Psyche says
“you don’t know what a “positive ideological component” means?”
Vogie baby, I don’t know what 3/4 of the stuff you say means, and I suppose that could be because i am just a Star F*ck Dusted Psycho ObamaBot but maybe, just mayyyyybeeeee, it might have a wee widdow smidgen to do with the language you employ.
I’m not hatin’ on you dude, like, for sure…I’m just sayin’, a great communicator is not a person who knows a million arcane and esoteric terms and spews them out to everybody’s befuddlement. Rather, a communicator is somebody who can relate to the audience and crafts his words so that the audience receives them with understanding.
So do an anti-Semitic rabid Obama Whore Dog a favor and dumb it down to my pathetically ignorant level, OK my friend?
voegelinian says
“I used to teach sons of the royal family in Riyadh”
Why? Cupidity? Stupidity?
Steph says
The highest turnover business in all muslim countries is corruption, and no doubt all the money handlers have heads up and bright shining eyes, the money handlers will be plotting the channels and making plans, ask the western charities how much money gets to people who need it, I’m betting not all of the money is going to end up abusing the west..
Daniel Moshe Johnson says
Shalom Aleic hem
That’s it, kill all the scientific minds that created inventions with alternative automobile operations, now, from gas money, these self appointed kings and princes impose Islam with gas money.
It’s a film gone wrong, transportation to aid in the transmission of a “loco motive”
to establish a global ideology based in a Luciferian cult, ISLAM. …….
SUPPORT ISRAEL, THE WORLDS ONLY HOPE FOR FREEDOM……..
Lily says
He owns part of FOX news! Has anyone noticed the changes in Fox. Fox is slowly being muzzled.
Hannah says
Isn’t he the one who said Arab nations should stop fighting with Israel though? Or is that another one?
Brian Hoff says
Than other Islamoprobic piece by Robert Spencer. Muslim only make up 1% of the US population than in 2015 make up 2% of the US population. Islam Law willnot be any threat to America First Amention at all. Clear Channel is than private own company that saw though Robert and Geller hate avds as being hateful and inaccurate.
Mark says
We need to deport all satans muslims NOW!