Posts Tagged ‘America’

The Issues we have with the Arab-Muslim world – What Obama won’t mention

June 4, 2009
The Issues we have with the Arab-Muslim world – What Obama won’t mention
 
Teaching that non-Muslims are non humans, such as Christians are “pigs” and Jews are “apes”.
 
Sharia law (implementation) horrors, including oppression of women.
 
Honor killings epidemic.
 
Playing “victim” while being the aggressor, such as the Arab “Palestinians”, Taliban, etc.
The Genocide campaign by radical Islam (Hezbollah, Hamas, Ahmadinejad, etc.) on Israel / Jews.
 
Bigoted Islamism: Persecution, oppression of and apartheid against all non Muslims in the Islamic world (including in S. Arabia, Palestinian Hamas, etc.).
 
Racist Arabism: Persecution, oppression of and apartheid against all non-Arabs in the Arab world, especially of native Egyptians (Nubians), Kurds, Copts, Assyrians, Berbers (native N. Africans), Jews (not just inside Israel), Africans (Africans living in Arab countries and the racist slavery in Sudan, Mauritania… genocide in Darfur).
 
The wide justification of Islamic violence all over the world.
 
Squeezing the world economy by power of oil prices (OPEC).
 
From the 22 Arab countries so far, they all range from totalitarianism to corruption, not even one has managed to be real free, equal and democratic.
 
The global Islamic radical campaign to dominate the world – untamed by “moderate” Muslims.
Advertisements

The cheap Arabist film: “The Visitor”

June 2, 2009

The cheap Arabist film: “The Visitor”

  
 
A. Victimhood It is a total reaffirmation of “we Arabs are always innocent victims”.
 
B. Fake grace ‘Mouna’ (mother of “Tarek”) is a “bad” actress, trying so hard to pose as “gracious”, she does a terrible job in convincing, she never really projects it, but rather as a time-bomb, waiting to explode every minute.
 
C. Arabs don’t need to apologize… Richard Jenkins, playing “Walter”, the American professor who all-of-a-sudden falls in love in Tambor-drumming, apologizes again and again for the FED’s arresting ‘Tarek’, an illegal immigrant, especially when he has been deported, he apologizes helplessly to Tarek’s mother for US’ (so called) “treatment”…, yet you don’t hear any apology from Tarek or his mother for what Arabs did to Americans that caused Americans to be wary of Arab immigrants more than of any other immigrants…
 
D. Arab or African? Somehow an Arab (“Tarek”: Haaz Sleiman) stars in African type of (drumming) music, how come? Is this an attempt to “dress” Arabs as Africans, thus alienating some Africans (those carrying a grudge) against whites?
 
E. Why come? If Arabs hate it over here, Why still come and immigrate, legally or illegally? And what is the big “horror” played in the film for a LEGAL deporting of an illegal alien anyway (you hear that phrase “it’s unfair”, again and again, making sure you hear that ‘Arabs have issues’…)?
By the same token it avoids the tale of terrible corruptive and cruel governments such as Syrian, “Palestinian”, etc. where they are running from…
 
F. Stupidity, ‘Tarek’ tries to argue that “I am not a terrorist, terrorists are well connected and protected“… what kind of argument is that? Besides, there are Arab terrorists who are loners, or those well connected but pose as loners… in order not to expose their contacts.
 
G. An immigration issue? Another apparent attempt of alienating is posing “Tarek” as an “immigration” issue, thus another effort is being made by Arabism (the divider) to gather some Latinos’ support against mainstream America.

The US/Britain 200 Years war against Islamic pirates – terrorists

April 9, 2009

The US/Britain 200 Years war against Islamic pirates – terrorists

For young Somalis, piracy offers power, prosperity
The Associated Press
There are several known pirate groups in Somalia. One is based in the southern port town of Kismayo, which is controlled by Islamic insurgents. …
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iR9XICoYi0CQt77GJUw5lNAPpG_AD97EGS200

 

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Somali pirates seize American ship, crew … by Ed Morrissey Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates …one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping … So here was an early instance of the “heads I win, tails you lose” dilemma, in which the United States is faced with corrupt regimes, on the one hand, and Islamic militants, on the other—or indeed a collusion between them. …
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/08/somali-pirates-seize-american-ship-crew/

A look back at history

Britain’s 200-year jihad (and US facing them)

Britain’s 200-year jihad There are many similarities between the stateless jihad of the 1700’s and ….. The pirate ships set sail for Algeria later that day, with the captives on …
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/008320.php

America’s Earliest Terrorists

Lessons from America’s first war against Islamic terror.

December 16, 2005, 9:55 a.m.
By Joshua E. London
At the dawn of a new century, a newly elected United States president was forced to confront a grave threat to the nation — an escalating series of unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslim terrorists. Worse still, these Islamic partisans operated under the protection and sponsorship of rogue Arab states ruled by ruthless and cunning dictators.
Sluggish in recognizing the full nature of the threat, America entered the war well after the enemy’s call to arms. Poorly planned and feebly executed, the American effort proceeded badly and at great expense — resulting in a hastily negotiated peace and an equally hasty declaration of victory.
As timely and familiar as these events may seem, they occurred more than two centuries ago. The president was Thomas Jefferson, and the terrorists were the Barbary pirates. Unfortunately, many of the easy lessons to be plucked from this experience have yet to be fully learned.
The Barbary states, modern-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, are collectively known to the Arab world as the Maghrib (“Land of Sunset”), denoting Islam’s territorial holdings west of Egypt. With the advance of Mohammed’s armies into the Christian Levant in the seventh century, the Mediterranean was slowly transformed into the backwater frontier of the battles between crescent and cross. Battles raged on both land and sea, and religious piracy flourished.
The Maghrib served as a staging ground for Muslim piracy throughout the Mediterranean, and even parts of the Atlantic. America’s struggle with the terror of Muslim piracy from the Barbary states began soon after the 13 colonies declared their independence from Britain in 1776, and continued for roughly four decades, finally ending in 1815.
Although there is much in the history of America’s wars with the Barbary pirates that is of direct relevance to the current “war on terror,” one aspect seems particularly instructive to informing our understanding of contemporary Islamic terrorists. Very simply put, the Barbary pirates were committed, militant Muslims who meant to do exactly what they said.
Take, for example, the 1786 meeting in London of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain. As American ambassadors to France and Britain respectively, Jefferson and Adams met with Ambassador Adja to negotiate a peace treaty and protect the United States from the threat of Barbary piracy.
These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Sound familiar?
The candor of that Tripolitan ambassador is admirable in its way, but it certainly foreshadows the equally forthright declarations of, say, the Shiite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1980s and the Sunni Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, not to mention the many pronouncements of their various minions, admirers, and followers. Note that America’s Barbary experience took place well before colonialism entered the lands of Islam, before there were any oil interests dragging the U.S. into the fray, and long before the founding of the state of Israel.
America became entangled in the Islamic world and was dragged into a war with the Barbary states simply because of the religious obligation within Islam to bring belief to those who do not share it. This is not something limited to “radical” or “fundamentalist” Muslims.
Which is not to say that such obligations lead inevitably to physical conflict, at least not in principle. After all peaceful proselytizing among various religious groups continues apace throughout the world, but within the teachings of Islam, and the history of Muslims, this is a well-established militant thread.
The Islamic basis for piracy in the Mediterranean was an old doctrine relating to the physical or armed jihad, or struggle.
To Muslims in the heyday of Barbary piracy, there were, at least in principle, only two forces at play in the world: the Dar al-Islam, or House of Islam, and the Dar al-Harb, or House of War. The House of Islam meant Muslim governance and the unrivaled authority of the sharia, Islam’s complex system of holy law. The House of War was simply everything that fell outside of the House of Islam — that area of the globe not under Muslim authority, where the infidel ruled. For Muslims, these two houses were perpetually at war — at least until mankind should finally embrace Allah and his teachings as revealed through his prophet, Mohammed.
The point of jihad is not to convert by force, but to remove the obstacles to the infidels’ conversion so that they shall either convert or become a dhimmi (a non-Muslim who accepts Islamic dominion) and pay the jizya, or poll tax. The goal is to bring all of the Dar al-Harb into the peace of the Dar al-Islam, and to eradicate unbelief. The Koran also promises rewards to those who fight in the jihad, plunder and glory in this world and the delights of paradise in the next.
Although the piratical activities of Barbary genuinely degenerated over the centuries from pure considerations of the glory of jihad to less grandiose visions of booty and state revenues, it is important to remember that the religious foundations of the institution of piracy remained central.
Even after it became commonplace for the pirate captains or their crew to be renegade Europeans, it was essential that these former Christians “turn Turk” and convert to Islam before they could be accorded the honor of engagement in al-jihad fil-bahr, the holy war at sea.
In fact, the peoples of Barbary continued to consider the pirates as holy warriors even after the Barbary rulers began to allow non-religious commitments to command their strategic use of piracy. The changes that the religious institution of piracy underwent were natural, if pathological. Just as the concept of jihad is invoked by Muslim terrorists today to legitimize suicide bombings of noncombatants for political gain, so too al-jihad fil-bahr, the holy war at sea, served as the cornerstone of the Barbary states’ interaction with Christendom.

In times of conflict, America tends to focus on personalities over ideas or movements, trying to play the man, not the board — as if capturing or killing Osama bin Laden, for example, would instantly end the present conflict. But such thinking loses sight of the fact that ideas have consequences. If one believes that God commands something, this belief is not likely to dissipate just because the person who elucidated it has been silenced. Islam, as a faith, is as essential a feature of the terrorist threat today as it was of the Barbary piracy over two centuries ago.
The Barbary pirates were not a “radical” or “fundamentalist” sect that had twisted religious doctrine for power and politics, or that came to recast aspects of their faith out of some form of insanity. They were simply a North African warrior caste involved in an armed jihad — a mainstream Muslim doctrine. This is how the Muslims understood Barbary piracy and armed jihad at the time, and, indeed, how the physical jihad has been understood since Mohammed revealed it as the prophecy of Allah.
Obviously, and thankfully, not every Muslim is obligated, or even really inclined, to take up this jihad. Indeed, many Muslims are loath to personally embrace this physical struggle. But that does not mean they are all opposed to such a struggle any more than the choice of many Westerners not to join the police force or the armed services means they do not support those institutions.
Whether “insurgents” are fighting in Iraq or “rebels” and “militants” are skirmishing in Chechnya or Hamas “activists” are detonating themselves in Israel, Westerners seem unwilling to bring attention to the most salient feature of all these groups: They claim to be acting in the name of Islam.
It is very easy to chalk it all up to regional squabbles, economic depression, racism, or post-colonial nationalistic self-determinism. Such explanations undoubtedly enter into part of the equation — they are already part of the propaganda that clouds contemporary analysis. But as Thomas Jefferson and John Adams came to learn back in 1786, the situation becomes a lot clearer when you listen to the stated intentions and motivations of the terrorists and take them at face value.
— Joshua E. London is the author of Victory in Tripoli: How America’s War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation (John Wiley & Sons, September 2005); for more about the book visit http://www.victoryintripoli.com.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/london200512160955.asp

 

Jihad in the Days of Jefferson
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961230585&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

 

When the Founding Fathers Faced Islamists May 27, 2008 … birth of US Naval power and the campaign against the Barbary pirates: …. that United States did not start the war with the Jihadists. …
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/when-the-founding-fathers-faced-islamists/

Sally Rovers incident, at the height of North African Arab Muslim pirates’ crimes against Christians, mainly British

 

Britain’s 200-year jihad

On my travels for the past few days, I have been reading a book which tells the story of a quite astonishing part of British history of which I was previously unaware. In ‘White Gold’, Giles Milton records the appalling details — gleaned,it appears, from a wealth of historical documents including diaries and letters — of a seaborne Islamic jihad against Britain which lasted for no less than two centuries.

From the early seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, thousands of British men women and children were kidnapped by Arab corsairs and sold into slavery in Morocco where they were kept in conditions of unspeakable barbarism. The astounding thing is that these British victims were not merely seized at sea where they ran the gauntlet of such pirates in places such as the Straits of Gibraltar. They were actually abducted from Britain itself.

Corsairs from a place in Morocco called Sale — who became known in Britain as the ‘Sally Rovers’ — sailed up the Cornish coast in July 1625, for example, came ashore dressed in djellabas and wielding damascene scimitars, burst into the parish church at Mount’s Bay and dragged out 60 men women and children whom they shipped off to Morocco. Thousands more Britons were seized from their villages or their ships and dispatched to the hell-holes of the Moroccan slave pens, from where they were forced to work all hours in appalling conditions building the vast palace of the monstrous and psychopathic Sultan, Moulay Ismail, who tortured and butchered them at whim. Most of them perished, but the book records the survival of a tenacious Cornish boy Thomas Pellow, who survived 23 years of this ordeal and whose descendant, Lord Exmouth, finally ended the white slave trade when he destroyed Algiers in 1816.

The book makes clear that this assault upon the British people (and upon Europeans and Americans who were similarly seized) was a jihad. The Sally Rovers, writes Milton, were called ‘al-ghuzat’– the term once used for the soldiers who fought with the Prophet — and were hailed as religious warriors engaged in a holy war against the infidel Christians who were pressurised to convert to Islam under threat of hideous punishment. What is even more striking was the response of the British crown. For almost two centuries, it made only the most ineffectual attempts to rescue its enslaved subjects. Those who had succumbed to the torture and inhumanity of the Sultan and converted to Islam were deemed to be no longer British and therefore outside the scope of any rescue. The pleas of Pellow’s parents were simply brushed aside. Popular outrage forced successive Kings to dispatch a series of feeble emissaries to try to get the Sultan to end this vile traffic and release the slaves, all to no avail.

But this went on for virtually two centuries. For almost 200 years the British state either sat on its hands or wrung them impotently while the Islamic jihad seized, enslaved and butchered its people. And then it appears, this staggering onslaught was all but airbrushed out of our history.

Food for disquieting thought.
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001423.html

 

‘Pirates of Penzance’ redo? James Zumwalt
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Soon after winning independence from England, the United States faced another war. Muslim pirates operating off North Africa’s Barbary Coast were seizing U.S., as well as European, ships sailing in international waters, holding them for tribute payment or plunder.
In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, meeting in London with Tripoli’s Muslim ambassador to Britain, inquired as to the reason for such Arab hostility. Acknowledging their attacks were unprovoked, the Tripoli ambassador explained it was their right and duty under the Koran as faithful Muslim followers to plunder and enslave the unfaithful – with those Muslims dying in the process going to paradise. To stop the attacks, the United States initially agreed to pay the Barbary pirates tribute, equal to about 20 percent of government revenues. Only later did an indignant United States launch two wars against them, ending in victory in 1815 and no further payments. European nations, acting individually and collectively, suppressed pirate activity as well, with the French conquest of Algiers in 1830 providing the last nail in the Barbary Pirates’ coffin.
Today, Muslim pirates again sail the seas off Africa’s coast. Mostly Somalis, these pirates have already attacked more than 60 ships this year in the vicinity of the Gulf of Aden – almost 5 times more than occurred all last year. Pirates gain confidence as owners prove willing to pay ransoms for the safe return of ships and crews, much like the United States first did with the Barbary Pirates.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/02/pirates-of-penzance-redo/

ARAB MUSLIM CONTROL on western MEDIA

February 15, 2009
ARAB MUSLIM CONTROL on western MEDIA

Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal, chief executive of S. Arabia’s Kingdom Holding Company Control on US (& other) media

Who owns CNN?

The answers might surprise you (or maybe not). Ever wonder why CNN and Time are so blatantly pro-islamic. Ever wonder why these weasels want are tooo eager to toe liberal / islamic propaganda??

A good chunk of AOL Time Warner is owned by Prince Alwaleed Ibn Talal the Saudi billionaire. It is well known that Prince AlWaleed is a front for the Saudi royal family. All of the oil money that is swindled from Aramco the Saudi oil company is “invested” by Prince Al Waleed and his company. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1465942/posts, http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_basketball_heat/2008/09/beasley-hurt-ea.html?cid=132826195#comment-132826195
From the ‘Saudi Online’ page:
RIYADH, 12 March — Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal announced yesterday that he has spent $1 billion on stocks over the last six months, including another $500 million on Citigroup.
“Already the world’s largest shareholder in Citigroup, the prince’s shareholding in the world’s most profitable bank is now around $10 billion,” said a press release from his Kingdom Holding group.
“At about $43, Citi’s share price was at too attractive a price,” the prince said in the statement.
And he added $450 million to existing shares in AOL Time Warner. “The price was very cheap at around $23,” the prince said.
“I believe in the power of the AOL brand and I am already a shareholder in this global media giant. Therefore, when the price reached lucrative levels, we decided to increase our stake. The weakness in AOL’s stock price is temporary as it reflects the temporary weakness in several areas in which it is involved,” Alwaleed said.
He also increased his stake in priceline.com to $100 million, or 5.4 percent of the company.

saudia-online.com/NewsMar02/news06.shtml

AOL BIAS – This is a growing guide to AOL political and religious bias seen by AOL subscribers as
demanded by its Arab owners.
Alwaleed,Arab,owned,Arab,money
AOL shows political and religious bias in its news coverage. The bias is also seen in the use of AOL message board
censorship policies. Poster’s messages are deleted by AOL monitors violating AOL’s own Terms of Service, TOS.
Time Warner has taken no action to stop the bias but has looked into it. They did nothing. AOL is owned by Arab money.
Alwaleed spent $1 billion on stocks recently
RIYADH, 12 March — Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal announced yesterday that he added $450 million to existing shares in AOL Time Warner.
“The price was very cheap at around $23,” the prince said.
http://www.dicksguides.com/ZDGKN/POLS/AOLissues/AOLownedbyArabs.htm

Is CNN International Really – ANN or the Arab News Network ??
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/comments/122382

CAIR, WAMY to launch massive propaganda campaign“We are planning to meet Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal for his financial support to our project ….
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/011934.php

Georgetown’s Capitulation to Radical Islam
By Joe Kaufman and Jeffrey Epstein
FrontPageMagazine.com Friday, January 06, 2006
Georgetown University was built with a Catholic and Jesuit identity. This bit of information is proudly displayed on the school’s website. But like Bethlehem in Israel, that identity is quickly being lost to a radical strain of Islam, as a counter-terror symposium has been abandoned and a pro-terror conference has been confirmed. Indeed, one of America’s most prestigious universities appears to be under siege.
Fearing violent reprisal from militant Muslim members of their student body, the school’s conference center rejected an educational symposium being hosted by America’s Truth Forum (formerly the People’s Truth Forum), a non-partisan, fact-based organization whose sole mission is to educate the American people on topics of national security. In this case, the subject matter to be discussed involved the “Underlying Roots of Terrorism: The Radical Islamist Threat to World Peace and National Security.”…
While the counter-terror symposium was shunned, an organization associated with violence has been awarded a forum. From February 17 – 19, the Palestine Solidarity Movement (PSM), an activist group that has expressed its willingness to work with Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, will be holding its “Fifth Annual Divestment Conference” on Georgetown University’s campus. At past events, shouts of “Kill the Jews” and “Death to Israel” could be heard amongst the crowd. And according to a news report, during PSM’s last conference, when a resolution to condemn terrorism was voted down, “the delegates erupted in cheers.”
When PSM announced its event, it’s interesting to see who they sent a press release to. A site that devotes a page to the release, Palestine Monitor, is said by one source to be a “PRO-TERRORIST SITE.” This is easy to understand, as the website contains numerous pages glorifying the Intifada (uprising) against Israel. Another location that prominently displays the press release is Ramallah Online, a hate site that equates the Jewish Star (Star of David) with the Nazi Swastika.
Not wanting to anger its on-campus insurgency, the university has remained hush about the event. The consideration of a small matter of money may also be on Georgetown’s mind. The PSM conference is coming on the heels of a $20 million donation to the school, given by a fairly effluent Saudi sheikh, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. This is the same sheikh who had previously donated $27 million to a telethon that raised money for the families of suicide bombers.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=3398EF71-9067-4C86-88D2-9A8AD51427A5

Hamas…. at least $50 million from wealthy Saudis like Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal, …
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?archive=112006

Saudi Prince Al Waleed bin Talal hoster of telethons for suicide bomber families buys large share of Fox News
Saudi prince advocates strategy of business not boycotts to ‘influence American public opinion”
September 25, 2005
http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/1109

Saudis Buying Shares of Fox lets freakin take over the oil fields already in saudi arabia… Prince al-Waleed ibnTalal already owned stock. …
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=17651_Saudis_Buying_Shares_of_Fox

New Islamic satellite channel launched
March 8, 2006
Filed under: Newspapers — Hans Henrik Lichtenberg
Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal, the chief executive of Saudi Arabia’s Kingdom Holding Company, has officially launched an Islamic satellite channel seeking to project Islam as a religion of moderation, the Arab News online daily reports. Al-Resalah (The Message) has been broadcasting informally since last Wednesday. At a press conference on Monday, Prince Alwaleed said the 24-hour channel would target an Arab audience, especially young people, by projecting ‘our Arab heritage through a modern medium.’. Al-Resalah will be the forerunner of a future English-language Islamic channel for Western audiences. The prince said the new Islamic network would provide a platform for a dialogue on religious, social and economic issues affecting everyday life, but its priority would be to counteract the misconceptions of Islam in other societies. Tarek Alsuwaidan, the channel?s general manager, said that 40 per cent of the programmes would be youth oriented, 30 per cent would target women and families, and 10 per cent would focus on children, Arab News reports. (AKI,March 08, 2006)
http://blog.newspaperindex.com/category/newspapers/page/7/

Saudi Prince Alwaleed ibn Talal owns 5.46 percent of Rupert Murdoch’s media conglomerate News Corp.
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/002958.html

The Failure of Western Universities [incls. Middle East studies, MESA, Saudi funding at Georgetown and Harvard, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, John Esposito, Martin Kramer, Daniel Pipes]

Kari Vogt, historian of religion at the University of Oslo, has stated that Ibn Warraq’s book “Why I am Not a Muslim” is just as irrelevant to the study of Islam as The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are to the study of Judaism. She is widely considered as one of the leading expert on Islam in Norway, and is frequently quoted in national media on matters related to Islam and Muslim immigration. People who get most of their information from the mainstream media, which goes for the majority of the population, will thus be systematically fed biased information and half-truths about Islam from our universities, which have largely failed to uphold the ideal of free inquiry. Unfortunately, this situation is pretty similar at universities and colleges throughout the West.

London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), scene to a growing number of anti-Semitic incidents from an increasingly pro-Islamic campus, issued a threat to one of its Jewish students to cease his protests against anti-Semitism at the University. Gavin Gross, an American, had been leading a campaign against the deterioration of conditions for Jewish students at SOAS, which is part of the University of London. SOAS had witnessed an escalation of anti-Jewish activity, in both severity and frequency. At the beginning of the year, the Islamic Society screened a video which compared Judaism with Satanism.
Meanwhile, in a move to “promote understanding between Islam and the West,” Saudi Arabia donated about SR13 million to a leading British museum. The officials said the money from Prince Sultan would pay for a new Saudi and Islamic gallery, which would help to portray Islamic culture and civilization in right perspectives. It would also help fund scholarships for Saudi students at Oxford University.

The Saudis and other oil-rich Arabs are busy buying influence over what Westerners hear about Islam. Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud, a member of the Saudi Royal Family, is an international investor currently ranked among the ten richest persons in the world. He is known in the USA for a $10 million check he offered to New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani in October 2001 for the Twin Towers Fund. Mayor Giuliani returned the gift when he learned that the prince had called for the United States to “re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance toward the Palestinian cause.”

Prince Talal is also creating a TV channel, Al-Resalah, to target American Muslims. He already broadcasts in Saudi Arabia. In 2005, Bin Talal bought 5.46% of voting shares in News Corp, the parent of Fox News. In December 2005 he boasted to Middle East Online about his ability to change what viewers see on Fox News. Covering the riots in France that fall, Fox ran a banner saying: “Muslim riots.” Bin Talal was not happy. “I picked up the phone and called Murdoch […] [and told him] these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty,” he said. “Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from Muslim riots to civil riots.”
http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/4257

: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

America and the (racist, backwarded) Arab world

December 18, 2008

Talking Points Memo & Impact Segment

America and the Arab world

“Press reports say the guy who threw his shoes at President Bush is a big hero in the Arab world, which points out how difficult it is to deal with some Muslims. There’s no question that the USA has sacrificed greatly to bring a measure of freedom to Iraq. If this guy had thrown his shoes at Saddam, he would have been executed. But now he has freedom of expression, thanks to us. The question is, why we are spending billions to free these people if many of them don’t even want freedom?

We just don’t know if our investment in blood and treasure will ever pay off. For now, the Bush administration and the incoming Obama administration must protect us from Muslim fanatics. There are two schools of thought: Obama apparently believes in a ‘softer’ approach, saying he will ban all coercive interrogation and close Guantanamo Bay; Dick Cheney thinks that’s a mistake and says America was right in getting tough on people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. So all Americans need to think about the danger from the Muslim world and how we should deal with it. Despite the economy, that remains the toughest problem Barack Obama will face in his presidency.”

http://www.billoreilly.com/show;jsessionid=23F1F5B6B618A305F3EAEA620CEF20A8?action=viewTVShow&showID=2180