MUSLIMS PREVENTING VISITS TO CHRISTIAN SITES

One of the main reasons for the Crusades was the reprehensible attitude of Muslim tyrants to the Christian pilgrims in the Holy Land. Having seized control over the holy places, and massacred Christians and Jews during their conquest, generations of Islamic warlords either outright forbade Christians and Jews from worshipping and visiting the sacred sites of their religions, or seized pilgrims and sold them at slave auctions.
In all, Muslim hegemony over other peoples' lands was horrific, barbaric, and rapacious.


One bright spot is the behaviour of the Turks.


Now the blight of Mohammedan bigotry and strongarmism has returned.


QUOTE:
One of Britain's premiere choirs is being prevented from performing in Bethlehem following a Palestinian protest over its scheduled performance in Israel.

The choir of Clare College, Cambridge, will sing Bach's "Christmas Oratorio" with the Israel Camerata Orchestra, but may not visit and perform in St George's Cathedral in East Jerusalem and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, where it was invited to sing by the Anglican bishop of Jerusalem, according to Tim Frank's Jerusalem Diary published Monday by the BBC.

The choir is being stymied in its efforts to visit areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority following a letter from the London-based Palestine Solidarity Campaign asking the choir to cancel its trip to Israel, saying it would "appear indifferent to Palestinian suffering."

The Palestinian Authority then asked the bishop of Jerusalem to withdraw the choir's invitation to sing in eastern Jerusalem and Bethlehem, and informed the choir that its members would not be welcome in Bethlehem as part of the bishop's pilgrimage.

SOURCE:
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/12/22/1009853/british-choir-prevented-from-performing-in-bethlehem



A NOTE ON TOLERANCE

Let me explain some pertinent facts to you Muslims:

Israel allows you to worship at your sites within the land. Europeans allow you to construct mosques in their ancient cities (mosques which, due to modern architecture and perfectly horrid taste, are ghastly eye-sores).
Even here in America, your practices are safeguarded - contrary to what your mad mullahs and lying imams tell you, the Mohammedan religion is alive and well in Yankee-stan.

Pressuring your captive dhimmis - pardon, "native" Christians - into blackmailing the west, however, is an action entirely beyond the pale of civilized conduct.

We accept that the degenerate Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia violently discriminate against non-Muslims and non-Arabs. After all, their brigands seized Mecca and Medina nearly a century ago, and have kept the entire Muslim world over a barrel ever since. Like you, we do not expect any better from those pigs.
And no Christian or Jew would want to settle in that poxed armpit of a place.
No biggie.

But if the rest of you Muslims wish to continue our acceptance of your presence and your cult outside of your wastelands and brutal societies, you need to play by civilized rules.

That means allowing our pilgrims to visit our holy places unmolested, and unhindered.



A NOTE ON INTOLERANCE

You've already driven the Christian majority out of Bethlehem.
The Christians of Iraq, Jordan, and Egypt, all of whom represent communities far older than the Islamic umma, keep emigrating to our lands - there is no place for them under your despotic and intolerant rule.
The Jews of the Arab lands have been robbed and expelled - except for those whom you viciously slaughtered.
In Pakistan and Indonesia your rabid dogs burn down churches and lynch believers. Your thugs in Iran and Central Asia are rapists and sadists - we have for years been treated to horrific news about your treatment of Christians and Jews in those benighted places.
Yearly, the record of your brutal bigotry grows ever more horrendous.


You do know, don't you, that there are several million Muslims living in the West?
Muslims who at present are still guaranteed safety and equal rights.


Perhaps you should consider that Western hospitality is a very brittle and recent overlay on centuries of violent tendencies. That such 'tolerance' is NOT limitless. And it is NOT fundamental to our psyche.
It really must be requited.

Merry Christmas. Bitches.

IRAN, SAUDI ARABIA, AND EXPANSIONISM - DOC'S TALK

There's an excellent post over at Doc's Talk, which I encourage you to study.

Quote:
"The Saudis fear both Iran's nuclear program and its expansionist agenda. [cut] The Iranian Revolution of 1979 launched a far-reaching competition between Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia for control of Islam and the ummah, the worldwide community of Muslims. Since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became president, Iran has increased its expenditure of money, energy, and time on proselytizing populations, from Africa to the Gulf.
Saudi Arabia, more than any other Sunni country, feels threatened by this new wave of Shiite proselytizing."

Here:
http://docstalk.blogspot.com/2009/03/gulf-scream_17.html


Another quote:
"Iran's expansionist strategy is not limited to religious affairs. Hundreds of Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah fighters who got their military training in Iran have infiltrated the Gulf since last year in order to "militarize" the Shiite communities of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. "

Go over here to read all of it.


You will find a lot of other good stuff on Doc's Talk, and it is well worth reading frequently.

[Please note: sometimes his blog (http://docstalk.blogspot.com/) does not show-up, and you will get a dialogue box that informs you that the internet site cannot be opened or the webpage cannot be displayed. It is a problem, yes.]

Sometimes he's far too hardcore for my taste (just like some of my other favourite bloggers), at other times I might wonder whether he's gone all soft - in other words, his is a thoughtful and worthwhile voice.
And he's both intelligent and literate. These are rare qualities.

CHARLES FREEMAN AND A JEWISH CABAL

There's an interesting post on ZioNation to which I would draw your attention.


Freeman versus "hardline Jews"
By Ami Isseroff.
March 11, 2009


Quote:
"The supporters of Freeman never fought for him on the issues, but rather on the one irrelevant bogey man issue of "Israel Lobby." Whether or not Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence, intended it, the struggle over the nomination of Freeman became an outpost in the battle in a war against Israel and supporters of Israel. It was intentionally billed as such by those who oppose Israel under the guise of "tough love." The issue is billed as support for settlements or "hard line" Israeli negotiating positions vis-à-vis the Palestinians, but that facade is transparent to anyone who wants to look. Some of the rhetoric has now degenerated into frank attacks on "Jews." "

Source:
http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000667.html


Quote:
"Freeman [cut] is a "realist," which means, in his interpretation, an appeaser of those who are perceived to be powerful and violent at the expense of the dissidents and powerless. His crusade against Israel, supported by all those ambassadors, is based on the common perception in the US diplomatic corps that has never been altered since before the Six Day War that Israel is a "non-viable client state" that exists at the pleasure of the United States and must do its bidding. "


Freeman himself states in his defense:
"There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government."

And:
"I have never sought to be paid or accepted payment from any foreign government, including Saudi Arabia or China, for any service, nor have I ever spoken on behalf of a foreign government, its interests, or its policies. I have never lobbied any branch of our government for any cause, foreign or domestic"

Oh? How very ..... 'interesting'!

Yet he is well-known as a hack for the house of Saud, fulsome in his praise of his masters. And his plaudits of the Chinese Communist crackdown at Tiananmen are unabashedly supportive of the brutality of dictators.

All this would echo the pre-war admirers of Hitler and Mussolini, were it not that the authoritarians he praises are in fact feudalists and communists.

Instead, one must think of the left's love affair with the tyrannies of Stalin, Mao, and Polpot - which carry over today in their flirtation with the most repressive and reprehensible elements among the Muslims. In this they are no blessing to the West, and provide ill-service to rational people in the Muslim world.


I shall let Ami Isseroff have the last word here, as it his piece with which I started.

Quote:
The battle is not over and it won't be. The anti-Israel lobby have already started their blood libel, (and) are casting Freeman as a latter day Simon of Trent. If you think I am exaggerating, read Robert Dreyfuss's rant in the Nation:

"---Joining in on the trashing of Freeman were the (let's face it) hard-line Jews of the Democratic Congress, including Senator Charles Schumer of New York, Rep. Steve Israel (yes, he is actually named "Israel") of New York, and of course, that former Democrat, Joe Lieberman -- all of whom crowded into the amen corner with AIPAC..."

At last the Jew word is out. "Hardline Jews" no less. And Dreyfuss and the Nation are not above juvenile wordplay with people's names, either. Don't let the "progressive" aura of The Nation or its pretensions to intellectuality fool you. Dreyfuss is a "hardline" right-wing anti-Semite who used to edit Executive Intelligence Review, described by Wikipedia as "the flagship journal of the Lyndon LaRouche movement." The demented jibe at Steve Israel's name speaks for itself. Dreyfuss's article is just one of many that mourn the innocent victim of the "hardline Jews."


Read the entire article here:
http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000667.html

Stay up-to-date here:
http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/


Now, I shall be the first to admit that Charles Freeman was eminently suited to the position, especially given that the Saudis and their friends in the oil-industry desperately need a powerful friend in Washington since their protégés returned to Texas.

I just do not think that it is acceptable for the heart of our administration to be occupied by elements intent on subverting the normal functions of our government, nor especially by an individual so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign state. And for that reason, I welcome the withdrawal of mister Freeman from consideration for this or any other post.
He is by no means an innocent victim, nor are his defenders honest men.


-------------------------

AFTERTHOUGHTS

If any reader now wishes to call me a hardline Jew too, please feel free to do so.

In point of fact, I am a liberal Gentile, as a close reading of my blog would tell you, though I do not expect you to believe this if you are a supporter of Charles Freeman or given to the paranoid conspiracy theories popular among the far left (in which, of course, you more than match the far right). And if that is indeed the case, your opinion ist mir really scheiß egal.

I like the term 'Hardline Jew'. It sounds like a badge of pride - what in Dutch we would call a 'Geuzennaam'.