[Login / Register]

Menu

Forums

error

This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.

Peter 1470 7259 Lod	RE: Human Shields In Gaza 12/23/2011 6:46:15 AM
	Hello Friends, I posted this in my joke thread but thought it should be here too. Shalom, Peter Quote: Hello Friends, The Latmah team came out with a brilliant glimpse of the future of Europe, oooooops I meant the Euro zone better known as Eurabia. This is not a joke and reality is a fact of life and if steps are not taken now to put an end to this in the end the joke will be on all of us. This is satire at it's best and shows what we can expect in the very near future. The United States and Canada are the next targets and unfortunately they're well on their way to succeeding with the 'kind' assistance of the Muslim Brotherhood infested B Hussein regime. MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL. Shalom, Peter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amQtXtkys6Q&feature=player_embedded
	Peter Fogel Babylon 7
	+0

Peter 1470 7259 Lod	RE: HSIG - Voices Of Palestine: Ismail Haniya 12/23/2011 9:57:32 AM
	Hello Friends, This post and the next are 2 more profiles in the series of "Voices Of Palestine". These 2 are supreme leaders in Hamas and are prime examples of why peace with them is not only not on the table but out of the question. There's not much I can add that you won't find in the profiles and hopefully understand that their only objective is to annihilate Israel and kill all the Jews. The next step for them is worldwide Jihad and world domination with the Caliphate as their ultimate objective. Shalom, Peter Voices of Palestine: Ismail Haniya Posted by Frank Crimi Bio ↓ on Dec 22nd, 2011 Editor’s note: Below is the latest profile of Frontpage’s new series, “Voices of Palestine,” which will illuminate the core beliefs, in their own words, of leading figures in the Palestinian death cult. Click the following to view the profiles of Ahmad Bahr, Mahmoud al-Zahar, Ibrahim Mudayris, Yasser Ghalban, Haj Amin al-Husseini, Wafa al-Bis, Mahmoud Abbas, Ahlam Tamimi, Yassir Arafat (Part I and Part II), Abdallah Jarbu, Sheik Ismail Aal Radhwan, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Yunis Al-Astal, Fathi Hamad and Khaled Mash’al. Well before becoming prime minister of the Hamas-controlled Gaza government in 2006, Ismail Haniya had been a leader in the Palestinian death cult’s campaign to exterminate the state of Israel and erect in its stead an Islamist state. Haniya’s commitment to jihad began shortly after he graduated in 1987 from the Islamic University of Gaza. He began planning terror attacks for Hamas during the First Intifada against Israel (1987-1993). Arrested in 1989, Haniya was briefly exiled to Lebanon in 1992 — along with 400 other Hamas terrorists — before returning back to Gaza in 1994. During his time in Lebanon, Haniya formed a close friendship with Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, a relationship which hastened Haniya’s meteoric rise through the terror group’s organizational ranks. Shortly after Yassin’s death in 2004, Haniya was chosen to lead the slate of Hamas candidates in the December 2005 Palestinian parliamentary elections, an election in which Hamas won majority control of the Gaza government. As a result, Haniya was sworn in as prime minister in March 2006 by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Any hope that democracy would have a civilizing effect on the Gaza Strip died early on after the election. By December 2006, during a foray to Iran, Haniya pledged Hamas’s continuing commitment to jihad and its fealty to the Iranian Islamic state: The world arrogance (US) and Zionists… want us to recognize the usurpation of the Palestinian lands and stop jihad and resistance and accept the agreements reached with the Zionist enemies in the past. I’m insisting from this podium that these issues won’t materialize. We will never recognize the usurper Zionist government and will continue our jihad-like movement until the liberation of Jerusalem. They (Israelis) assume the Palestinian nation is alone. This is an illusion. … We have a strategic depth in the Islamic Republic of Iran. This country (Iran) is our powerful, dynamic and stable depth. While Haniya was able to solidify Hamas’s strategic alliance with Iran, he was less successful in negotiating alliances with rivals at home. Specifically, tensions from the 2006 Palestinian election had led to violent clashes between Hamas and Fatah supporters; unrest which led Fatah leader Abbas to dismiss Haniya as prime minister in June 2007, an action deemed illegal by Hamas and thus never acknowledged by the terror group. Of course, it’s not surprising that Hamas rejected the authority of Abbas to terminate Haniya from his position as prime minister. As Haniya explained in a speech given in October 2006, Hamas’s power is derived from a much higher source: We [derive our] legitimacy from the legitimacy of the jihad. We are a government born from the womb of the resistance, from the womb of the martyrs… We are a government that comes out of resistance and jihad, and out of the desire for resistance and jihad against the Zionist occupation. They have tried to pressure Hamas to abandon resistance and to abandon arms. They tried to pressure Hamas to abandon its strategic choice in Palestine, all of Palestine. They tried to pressure Hamas to recognize the legitimacy of the occupation. But they failed… We say Hamas will not change its constant principles. The constants and the strategy of Hamas do not change according to circumstances. Hamas will stay faithful to jihad, to resistance, to guns, to Palestine and to Jerusalem. Throughout his tenure, Haniya has consistently preached this death cult mentality to his enthusiastic followers in Gaza. In 2010, he said on Hamas-controlled Al Aqsa TV: We are a mujahid nation, a nation that makes sacrifices, a nation of Jihad. Our cries are of Jihad for the sake of Allah. This is a nation of martyrdom and martyrdom-seeking, a nation of Jihad for the sake of Allah. Moreover, according to Haniya, the dictates of Allah precluded the possibility of Hamas ever deviating from a jihadist course: The strategic option of Jihad was determined by Allah for this nation. At no time may Muslims – especially under occupation – negotiate whether there should or shouldn’t be resistance or Jihad. This cannot be discussed by a group of believers, a Muslim people, especially a people under occupation. This is inconceivable. We have no choice in this matter. The strategic option was determined when the first arrow was shot, the first spear cast, and the first bullet fired. More than just a religious imperative, Haniya preaches that the importance of terrorism as a strategy lies in the fact that it works so well on Jews, who, unlike the Palestinians, “love life more than any other people, and they prefer not to die.” Americans, too, are the objects of Haniya’s murderous hatred. In May 2011, he delivered a heartfelt statement on the killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden: We believe that this continues an American policy that is based on oppression and on the shedding of Arab and Muslim blood. Regardless of the different views in Arab and Islamic circles, we, of course, condemn the assassination or killing of a Muslim mujahid and an Arab. We pray for Allah to cover him with His mercy, next to the prophets, the righteous, and the martyrs. As recently as December 2011, at a rally marking the 24^th anniversary of Hamas’s founding, Haniya issued a call for the formation of an Arab army “to liberate Jerusalem and the Aksa mosque.” Haniya then further stoked the fury of the cheering crowd of 350,000 crazed Palestinians by intoning: Resistance is the way and it is a strategic choice to liberate Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea and to remove the invaders from the blessed land of Palestine. We affirm that armed resistance is our strategic option and the only way to liberate our land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the River [Jordan]. God willing, Hamas will lead the people… to the uprising until we liberate Palestine, all of Palestine. Haniya’s exhortation came a year to the day after he made similar remarks at a rally in 2010. The statements leave no question that the murderous pursuit of “Palestine” has nothing to do with the occupation of Palestinian territories, but the entire existence of Israel itself: [T]he occupation has no future on the land of Palestine. When I say “the land of Palestine,” I am not referring [only] to the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem. When I say that the occupation has no future on the land of Palestine, I refer to Palestine from the [Mediterranean] Sea to the [Jordan] River, and from Rosh Honiara to Rafah. The occupation will not survive on this land. Never! And while the decades-long campaign to wipe Israel off the map has yet to succeed, rest assured that a younger generation of Palestinians is being methodically groomed to finish the task. As Haniya mused in 2007: The generation that is fighting the Zionists today and that started the first and second intifadas is a young, highly motivated generation. This is the generation that will free Palestine. With figures like Haniya leading the way, many more generations of Palestinians will likely be lost. Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here. About Frank Crimi Frank Crimi is a writer living in San Diego, California. You can read more of Frank's work at his blog, www.politicallyunbalanced.com.
	Peter Fogel Babylon 7
	+0

Peter 1470 7259 Lod	RE: HSIG - Voices of Palestine: Khaled Mash’al 12/23/2011 10:03:10 AM
	Hello Friends, Here's the second of the 2 profiles. Shalom, Peter Voices of Palestine: Khaled Mash’al Posted by Frontpagemag.com Bio ↓ on Dec 19th, 2011 Editor’s note: Below is the latest profile of Frontpage’s new series, “Voices of Palestine,” which will illuminate the core beliefs, in their own words, of leading figures in the Palestinian death cult. Click the following to view the profiles of Ahmad Bahr, Mahmoud al-Zahar, Ibrahim Mudayris, Yasser Ghalban, Haj Amin al-Husseini, Wafa al-Bis, Mahmoud Abbas, Ahlam Tamimi, Yassir Arafat (Part I and Part II), Abdallah Jarbu, Sheik Ismail Aal Radhwan, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Yunis Al-Astal and Fathi Hamad. Mash’al, the political bureau head of the terrorist group Hamas, has little patience for Palestinians who suggest reconciliation with Israelis. This is not at all surprising, because his group, Hamas, is dedicated to the permanent destruction of Israel by violent means. Indeed the Hamas Covenant, written in 1988, declares: “There is no other solution for the Palestinian problem other than jihad [holy war]. All the initiatives and international conferences are a waste of time and a futile game.” Consider Mash’al’s reaction to a speech delivered at the Aqaba peace summit by former Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Abu Mazen, who, calling for an end to the armed Intifada, declared: “We will exert all of our efforts using all our resources to end the militarization of the Intifada, and we will succeed. The armed Intifada must end, and we must use and resort to peaceful means in our quest to end the occupation and the suffering of Palestinians and Israelis. And to establish the Palestinian state . . . our goal is clear, and we will implement it firmly and without compromise: a complete end to violence and terrorism.” In response to these words, Mash’al condemned what he called “the conspiracy being woven against the Palestinian people,” a conspiracy he believed was being carried out with Mazen’s passive acquiescence. Mash’al accused President Bush of conspiring with Israel to keep the Palestinians eternally subservient. And he denounced Mazen for speaking “[about] the [Palestinian] resistance as terror, and about putting an end to the armed resistance.” In short, Mash’al characterizes suicide bombings targeting Israeli civilians as legitimate forms of “armed resistance.” In July 2006, Mash’al said: ”You [Israelis] will be defeated with God’s help. Victory’s day is approaching with God’s help. (audience replies with “Death to Israel” and “Death to America”) Before Israel dies, it will not escape humiliation and surrender. Before they die, with God’s help they will witness humiliation and surrendering. And America will not be there to help; nor will their generals. The last general is forgotten. God made Sharon disappear and he was departed from them. … We forced a new equation in this battle. The new equation plays to our hands. We will defeat them [the Israelis]. We will defeat them emotionally and mentally before we defeat them in the field of battle. Gaza is the victory’s bed. … Victory in these elections sends a message to Israel and America and all the abusers of this world. With us you will never succeed and you will always lose. If you want war, we are ready for war. … The days of defeat within six days with hours are over. Today you are fighting against the army of Allah. Today you are fighting against people who care for dying for Allah, dying for honor and prestige more than they care for life itself.”
	Peter Fogel Babylon 7
	+0

Peter 1470 7259 Lod	RE: HSIG - Between Responsible And Irresponsible Isolationism 12/24/2011 8:09:23 AM
	Hello Friends, Aside from being a racist Ron Paul is also an isolationist. His naive and dangerous thoughts on this issue boil down to the stupidly simplistic theory that if you leave them alone they will leave you alone. That's why he blames the United States for Jihadi terrorist attacks and ultimately the reason for the 911 attack. That's why he has no problem with a nuclear Iran cos he believes that if we leave them alone they will leave us alone disregarding the fact that the Lunatic Iranian regime claims that both the US and Israel are its main targets. He also believes the war on terrorism is unnecessary for the same reasons. As I said he's stupidly naive and dangerous. I've already written that Islams plan for world domination didn't start with the Iraqi war nor the Afghanistan war but thousands of years ago. They've been killing infidels throughout the centuries and believe it or not America didn't exist then. So Paul's idiotic theories are just that idiotic and dangerous. The enemy is already amongst us and rather then prepare and protect ourselves Ron Paul would have us isolate ourselves from reality even though Jihad is already here and we are under perpetual attack. I read in other threads here that some think that since 911 there have been no Jihadi attacks on American soil. I was quite amazed when I read that and came to the conclusion that they are either blind to what's happening in their own back yard or simply deaf, dumb and blind. A few simple reminders of the many jihadi attacks in America is the Ft. Hood jihadi attack (13 murdered and close to 40 wounded) by Maj. Hassan, the Times Sq. bomber that was luckily stopped, the murder of soldiers in a recruiting station and many many more. It's here and home grown jihad is growing by leaps and bounds. Luckily many of them are thwarted by intelligence sources and lives were saved. So, you can't isolate yourself from the world especially when your own turf has already been infiltrated by the enemy. The below article by Daniel Greenfield discusses Isolationism and is an excellent read and brings some interesting facts that many might not be aware of. I'll be posting this in the President That Hates His Country thread and here since it deserves to be there too and relates to both threads. Shalom, Peter Between Responsible and Irresponsible Isolationism Posted: 21 Dec 2011 08:23 PM PST There is one fundamental element that is absolutely necessary for an isolationist foreign policy. Isolation. Isolationism without physical isolation is as much good as belligerence without an army to back it up. American isolationism might have been feasible during WW1 when its neighbors were either friendly or no threat, there was no danger from the Pacific and a fleet crossing the Atlantic seemed unlikely. Though it wasn't so unlikely even then. As far back as 1897 and long before any American involvement in Europe, Operational Plan Three called for shelling New York and seizing parts of Virginia, as a staging base for attacks on Washington and Baltimore. Plans were drawn up in Germany for the occupation of Boston and Philadelphia. Vice-Admiral August Thomsen wrote, "At the moment every thinking German officer is occupied with the consequences of a belligerent conflict between Germany and the United States of America." No American politician was thinking the same thing. America had not intervened in any European wars and had no interest in Germany. But that didn't matter. The Kasier wanted to seize parts of the hemisphere and that meant breaking the dominant power in the region. America's weak fleet made it seem like an easy target. That is the most important part of the equation that isolationists fail to include in their calculations. Regardless of our foreign policy, we are still a target. Whatever our calculations are, potential enemies may have calculations entirely different from our own. They don't just react to what we do, they have their own plans and agendas. Passivity isn't a defense for the ostrich or for a nation. In 1900 while America slept, German diplomats were scouting Cape Cod and Provincetown as support bases for an attack on Boston. And the Germans weren't alone. In the early 20th century there were British plans for an assault on New England. But Germany's failure to formulate an alliance with other European powers against the United States led to the abandonment of Operational Plan Three. When Charles Lindbergh ridiculed the idea of a foreign attack on America, such an attack was less than a year away, but variations of it had been planned by European powers for a good deal longer than that. Terrorist attacks by foreign agents were a now forgotten reality during WW1, including the Black Tom explosion which severely damaged the Statue of Liberty, the Vanceboro bridge bombing, and in an early form of biological warfare a laboratory in Chevy Chase was working on anthrax and glanders cultures to be used on horses. With the jet plane and the intercontinental ballistic missile, isolationism became completely unworkable without strong deterrence. Even if the United States had chosen to abandon Europe, it would still have needed massive nuclear missile stockpiles, a sizable fleet and military, and a policy of Mutually Assured Destruction just to pursue a policy of isolationism. And had the USSR managed to make even deeper inroads in South America, the United States would have been forced to either push it out or increase the size of its forces to compensate for the loss of a buffer zone against preemptive attacks. It's not impossible to have an isolationist foreign policy today, to cut any alliances with the rest of the world. But there's a fundamental difference between a responsible and an irresponsible isolationist policy. A responsible isolationist policy recognizes that we have enemies who will act regardless of what we do and prepares against the possibility of war without actively seeking it out. An irresponsible isolationist foreign policy however acts as if we have no enemies and that any talk that we have enemies is a conspiracy to bring us into a war. It accepts every bit of enemy propaganda as gospel and assumes that if we just "stop bothering them", they'll "stop bothering us". It assumes that the enemy is entirely motivated by our actions, that any conflict we are in is the result of our foreign policy and that isolationism will avert any such conflicts. This is the version of isolationism that you hear in the Republican debates from Ron Paul. It's the version that Americans heard back in the 1930's from Lindbergh. Rather than recognizing that a military buildup is an important deterrent to war, it attacks military buildups as provocative. It assumes that the only possible reason why we might be attacked are foreign entanglements and if we just tuck our heads in then there will be no conflict. The absurdity of this approach when it comes to the current clash of civilizations with Islam is obvious enough. This isn't a conflict that dates back from 1991 or 1948 or even the First Barbary War in 1805. It's a war that predates the United States and modern day Europe. It is a conflict that goes back over a thousand years to the decline and fall of the eastern remains of the Roman Empire and the rise of Islam as a militant unification ideology to fill that void. American foreign policy can't turn back the clock on that history. It can affect events in the present day, but it can't undo the roots of a conflict that it has inherited. American foreign policy had a good deal to do with the rise of Islamic states built on petrodollars, but isolationism is certainly not going to make them go away. Certainly not Ron Paul's brand of isolationism which pretends that there is nothing wrong with Islam that can't be fixed with an American isolationist foreign policy. During the last debate, Ron Paul asked why they're bombing us and not Sweden or Switzerland. The answer is very simple. You only bomb people who resist. Stockholm is 20 percent Muslim. Muslim terrorists operate out of Sweden, including a top Al-Qaeda leader, but they don't need to attack a territory that they're already on the way to ruling through natural demographics. 44 percent of Europe's population is over 45. Under 34 percent is under 30. Meanwhile half of European Muslims are under 30. The math isn't very hard to do. The only countries that need to be targeted by Muslim terrorists are those which have a high enough birth rate that demographics alone won't do the trick. The First World country with the highest birth rate is Israel. It's also the country most targeted by Muslim terrorists. The First World country with the second highest birth rate is the United States. It is the country second most targeted by terrorists. The next major countries on the list are France and the UK. There's a term for this sort of thing. It's demographic suppression and political intimidation. Back in the 19th century the Kasier hoped that shelling Manhattan and seizing a few cities would bring the United States to the negotiating table. Japan thought that bombing Pearl Harbor would accomplish the same thing. But while Tojo was wrong, the House of Saud was correct. September 11 brought the United States to the negotiating table with Islam. Muslims have been granted special privileges and their immigration rate has increased. That's one path to an eventual demographic domination. Islamic attacks against the United States may emerge from various micro-events, but the macro-event from which they originate is the shared history of the Western world and the ongoing conflict between the Muslim world and the West. Some isolationists may act as if the United States can break with European history through assertion alone. It cannot. Like it or not it shares a common history and a common culture. America derives from Europe, and whether Americans recognize it or not, the rest of the world does. To Islam, America is not an island, it is another outpost of an enemy civilization that must be subdued so that the way of Mohammed will triumph around the world. Ron Paul type isolationists fail to distinguish between the proximate causes of war and the ultimate causes of war. A proximate cause of war may be a ship that has wandered into the wrong area which may have been caused by a trade dispute which may have been caused by debts which may have been caused by growing militarism and greed for land. But none of those are truly the ultimate cause of war. The ultimate cause of war is the incompatibility of two systems and two civilizations within the same space. Technological development means that the old boundaries are all but gone. Immigration means that the enemy population is already here. The rise of Islam means that war is inevitable, all that remains are the details, which battle, on what terms and in what form, and the larger detail of who will win. Rationalism isolationism accepts that war may be inevitable but chooses to meet it on our terms. Irrational isolationism, which often carries with it defeatist and treasonous overtones, accepts the enemy's justifications for the conflicts and assumes that if we modify our behavior accordingly that there will be no need for war. "Si vis pacem, para bellum," was a rule that the old Romans knew. If you would have peace, prepare for war. The emblem of the Strategic Air Command was an olive branch and thunderbolt held in a mailed fist. Its motto was "Peace is Our Profession". The SAC kept the peace through the threat of war. Only an isolationism that understands the meaning of that motto can be successful.
	Peter Fogel Babylon 7
	+0

Peter 1470 7259 Lod	RE: HSIG - Muslim Scholar: Freedom Of Speech Doesn't Exist In Islam 12/25/2011 7:59:31 AM
	Hello Friends, Hmmmm, the below video might be an eye opener for some but those of us that have been studying Islam and writing about the inherent dangers we face from it for years aren't surprised in the least. Islam is a man made document that dictates every aspect of your life and as its name tells us all adherents of this book written by the big Mo have to SUBMIT to the written word else you're not a true believer. So, when the scholar in the below video tells them there is no freedom of speech in Islam he is simply stating the obvious. The only freedom he claims you have is whether you submit to Islam or not. If not then you're just another kuffir and liable for the direst of punishments and in Islam we know exactly what that means. The B Hussein regime is supporting the democratic election process in Egypt yet these same Imams, Mullahs and scholars tell us day in day out there is no democracy in Islam. These elections in which the Muslim Brotherhood will ascend as the majority party will be the last free elections in Egypt (unless the military takes a stand against them) and the largest Arab state will now be a photo copy of the Iranian lunatic regime and present a danger to the world as the Iranians do. It's time to take notice and understand that Islam and their Shariah law present a danger to the western world and with the rise of Muslim immigrants in the United States and Eurabia they are well on the road to victory and the world wide Caliphate their 'religion' calls for. It's wake up time my friends. Shalom, Peter http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dHcqUk-4FiY
	Peter Fogel Babylon 7
	+0

My Links

Like us on Facebook!