Last May, Raymond Ibrahim, a “Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center” and “a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor,” quoted an Arabic documentary video saying that
“The new jihad allows brothers and sisters in Syria belonging to the [al-Qaeda linked] al-Nusra Front to marry each other under the name of jihad because of the lack of girls among fighters of that organization.”[1]
Ibrahim moved quickly to assert, “The rationale and justification of these fatwas is based on the Islamic maxim, ‘necessity makes the prohibited permissible,’ not unlike the more familiar adage, ‘the ends justify the means.’”[2]
For Ibrahim, “Sex Jihad” is intrinsically Islamic and should therefore be repulsive to any thinking person. He wrote unequivocally,
“In other words, because fighting to make the ‘word of Allah,’ or Sharia, supreme is the greatest good, and because sexually-deprived jihadis fighting to do just that may lose morale and quit the theatre of war for lack of women, it is permissible, indeed laudable, for Muslim women—including apparently relatives—to volunteer to give up their bodies to these men so that they can continue the jihad to empower Islam, in accordance with the Koran…”[3]
And then this:
“The fact is, the maxim, ‘necessity makes the prohibited permissible,’ is responsible for any number of seeming contradictions: Muslim women must chastely be covered head-to-toe—yet, in the service of jihad, they are allowed to prostitute their bodies.
“Homosexuality is forbidden—but permissible if rationalized as a way to kill infidels. Lying is forbidden—but permissible to empower Islam. Suicide is forbidden—but permissible during the jihad—called ‘martyrdom.’ Stealing is forbidden—but the rightful booty of the jihadi who conquers infidels.”[4]
Let us grant Ibrahim this unconvincing premise for the moment. Who, then, is supporting the Syrian jihadists to oust Assad? Iran? Russia? China? Japan? North Korea? Fidel Castro?
And if Ibrahim wants the dwell on “sex jihad,” doesn’t he know that hundreds upon hundreds of American men and women have been literally raped and sexually abused in the military right after the neocons led America into a bloody conflict in Iraq?
Is Ibrahim really going to tell us that he didn’t know that both the Israeli regime and the Zionist State of America have given weapons and millions upon millions of dollars to the Syrian terrorists? Is he really that dishonest? Or is he using Islam and Christianity to pursue the same old Zionist propaganda in his book Crucified Again?
Daniel Pipes
Is Ibrahim going to tell us that he didn’t know that Jewish neocon Daniel Pipes sought to support both Assad and the Syrian terrorists at the same time and at the expense of American taxpayers?
Doesn’t he know that the evidence indicates that “the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS),” according to a Snowden document?
Doesn’t he know that “[ISIS leader] Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech”?
Doesn’t he know that the same terrorist group also worked with the CIA? Doesn’t he know that “The Muslim Terrorist Apparatus was Created by US Intelligence as a Geopolitical Weapon”? Doesn’t he know that the Guardian blew everything out of proportion by documenting just recently that
“Nearly all of the highest-profile domestic terrorism plots in the United States since 9/11 featured the ‘direct involvement’ of government agents or informants”?
The Guardian continued,
“Some of the controversial ‘sting’ operations ‘were proposed or led by informants,’ bordering on entrapment by law enforcement. Yet the courtroom obstacles to proving entrapment are significant, one of the reasons the stings persist.
“The lengthy report, released on Monday by Human Rights Watch, raises questions about the US criminal justice system’s ability to respect civil rights and due process in post-9/11 terrorism cases.
“It portrays a system that features not just the sting operations but secret evidence, anonymous juries, extensive pretrial detentions and convictions significantly removed from actual plots.
“‘In some cases the FBI may have created terrorists out of law-abiding individuals by suggesting the idea of taking terrorist action or encouraging the target to act,’ the report alleges.
“Out of the 494 cases related to terrorism the US has tried since 9/11, the plurality of convictions – 18% overall – are not for thwarted plots but for ‘material support’ charges, a broad category expanded further by the 2001 Patriot Act that permits prosecutors to pursue charges with tenuous connections to a terrorist act or group.
“In one such incident, the initial basis for a material-support case alleging a man provided ‘military gear’ to al-Qaida turned out to be waterproof socks in his luggage.
“Several cases featured years-long solitary confinement for accused terrorists before their trials. Some defendants displayed signs of mental incapacity.
“Jurors for the 2007 plot to attack the Fort Dix army base, itself influenced by government informants, were anonymous, limiting defense counsel’s ability to screen out bias.”[5]
In 1999, the Guardian noted that
“From 1985 to 1992, 12,500 foreigners were trained in bomb-making, sabotage and urban guerrilla warfare in Afghan camps the CIA helped to set up.”[6]
Is Ibrahim going to tell us that he didn’t know that his Jewish colleague at FrontPage Magazine Ben Shapiro implicitly or covertly supported sex orgies in Russia? Didn’t he know that Jewish neocon Victoria Nuland wanted to “fuck the E.U.”?
Doesn’t Ibrahim know that the Israeli military forces began to broadcast pornography when they took over a Palestinian TV station in Ramallah in 2002?[7]
Doesn’t he know that sex orgies were rampant in places like Abu Ghraib, where “fucking a kid” was the norm, and where this sort of practice was defended by virtually every flaming neoconservative, including Dinesh D’Souza?[8] Here is what Ann Coulter wrote:
“the constant drumbeat of failure, quagmire, Abu Ghraib, Bush-lied-kids-died has been so successful that merely to say the war in Iraq is going well provokes laughter.”[9]
(Yes, it does provoke laughter. And it was not the liberals who were laughing, either. I would encourage Coulter to pick up a copy of Andrew Bacevich’s recent book, Breach of Trust: How Americans Failed Their Soldiers and Their Country, and see how.)
Coulter is not finished:
“I suffered more just listening to the endless repetition of those Abu Ghraib stories than the actual inmates ever did.”[10]
Coulter keeps on surprising me. I never would have thought that she was that inept in her thinking. Is she really saying that the neocons would have given the inmates the political freedom in the media to speak their minds if they wanted to detail what happened at Abu Ghraib?Take Snowden, for example. Didn’t the government and many neocons put a price on his head? Coulter needs to get real.
Let us continue take Ibrahim’s self-serving argument to task. Mordecai Kedar, an Israeli Middle East scholar at Bar-Ilan University, has recently declared,
“The only thing that can deter terrorists, like those who kidnapped the children and killed them, is the knowledge that their sister or their mother will be raped. It sounds very bad, but that’s the Middle East.”[11]
There is more. In 2010, one major Israeli news network declared that
“A new halachic study ruled that seducing an enemy agent for the sake of national security is an important mitzvah…
“The ruling, made by Rabbi Ari Shvat, was included in the latest issue of “Tehumin,” an annual collection of articles about Jewish law and modernity, which is published by the Zomet Institute, a non-profit organization dedicated to seamlessly merging Halachic Judaism with modern Israeli life.
“Rabbi Shvat explores the issue of women used to seduce enemy agents in order to cajole information out of them or see them captured.
“The use of ‘Valentine operatives’ or ‘honey traps,’ as they are called in intelligence circles, was applied in the case of atom spy Mordechai Vanunu, and according to foreign media reports, in the recent assassination of senior Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, last January.
The Talmud, Shvat argues,
“ruled that sexual intercourse with a gentile for the sake of a national cause is not only sanctioned, but is a highly important mitzvah.” The rabbi continues,If Ibrahim really is against sexual politics and ideology, why doesn’t he write articles refuting those rabbis? We would certainly applaud him for doing so.
“Naturally, an unmarried operative should be preferred in ‘honey trap’ cases, but if there is no other choice but to use a married women… her husband should divorce her and marry her again after the fact.”
ISIS in Iraq
By the end of April 2013, it was obvious to all that the Syrian terrorists were not going to listen to the West, even though the West had been providing weapons to them for months.
In Aleppo, Syria’s largest city, they controlled the power plant and even presided over a court that legislated Islamic law. Ari Ratner, a fellow at the Truman National Security Project and former Middle East advisor in the Obama State Department, declared that those terrorists are “scary,” but Ratner still wanted to oust Assad.[12]
Other countries such as Bahrain are not blind. They began to see that terrorism is a US manipulation.
By December 2012, posters across Bahrain declared, “Terrorism is a US Industry.”[13]
In the Tehran Times, it was reported that the West lured al-Qaeda into Syria.[14] Avner Cohen, retired Israeli official, philosopher and historian, and senior research fellow at the National Security Archive at George Washington University, put it this way:
“Hamas, to my regret, is Israel’s creation.”[15]
The United Kingdom too was planning to provide the Syrian rebels with ammunition in December 2012.[16] By the middle of December, the United States signed an official deployment order to send at least four hundred American soldiers to Turkey in order to help oust Assad. Germany and the Netherlands also sent troops there.[17]
NATO had already supported Turkey at the beginning of the month.[18] As the days went by, Europe was largely united in helping the rebels and terrorists oust Assad.[19] Other countries such as France, Turkey, and the Gulf states put their stamp of approval on the Syrian rebels/terrorists.[20]
As it turned out, the United States was training several members of the Syrian rebels/terrorists on the borders of Jordan,[21] just like Bush trained the MEK in order to create a clandestine war against Iran.
Iranian intellectuals such as Professor Muhammad Sahimi wrote against the United States removing the MEK as a terrorist organization,[22] and the US knew very well that the MEK had committed terrorist acts over the years, but once again the Zionist regime seems to have no boundary.
In October of last year, Obama gave a hint of what he was going to do by sending more than 150 US forces to Jordan.[23]
If Ibrahim is complaining about “sex jihad” among the Syrian rebels/terrorists, why doesn’t he quarrel with his Jewish neocons who largely supported the movement in the first place? And if he cannot do that, does he really want us to take him seriously?
Let us suppose that Ibrahim was not aware of any of this. Is he going to tell us that he does not know what the Talmud actually propounds about sexual incest and even Christianity’s founder? Jewish scholar Peter Schaeffer of Princeton writes,
“The most prominent characteristic that dominates quite a number of the rabbinic stories is sex, more precisely sexual promiscuity. Sexual promiscuity is already presented as the foundation story of the Christian sect: its hero is the son of a certain Miriam and her lover Pandera—a mamzer, born out of wedlock (because his mother was married to a certain Stada or Pappos b. Yehuda)…
“The other allusions in our rabbinic texts to sexual promiscuity refer to the bad son, to the frivolous disciple, and to the understanding of Christianity as an orgiastic cult.”[24]
This sexual perversion has largely been one of the perennial paradoxes in Rabbinic Judaism, and it indirectly gave us the Sabbatean cult in the eighteenth century, whose participants
“engaged in secret antinomian rites: they practiced necromancy, masturbated and then smeared the whole body with the semen, permitted or even encouraged incest, practiced wife swapping and group sex, advocated a complete sexual freedom, and ‘permitted perjury, theft, and adultery.”[25]
Moving on to the twentieth century, this sexual ideology ended up producing Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis, which largely followed the Sabbatean cult.[26]
If Ibrahim is horrified by the thought that “sexually-deprived jihadis” want to have sex with women, at least they do not want to have sex with their mothers and long to replace their fathers in bed, as Freud preposterously postulated. Or, to put it quite bluntly, those terrorists do not practice literal pedophilia, as the Talmud teaches. Consider this:
“When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this, it is as if one puts the finger into the eye…[as] tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years…
“A Proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest.”
As
Jewish scholars have acknowledged, the Mishnah Sotah “is often
voyeuristic and at times can even be classified as pornographic.”[27]If Ibrahim is against all that, why doesn’t the public know about this Talmudic interpretation? Listen to this:
“Orthodox Jews convicted of or charged with child sex abuse in Brooklyn should have their identities protected because of the community’s “tight-knit and insular” nature, prosecutors claim
“Rejecting the request under the state’s Freedom of Information Law, the Brooklyn district attorney’s office stated that Orthodox Jews deserve a blanket exemption from the usual public disclosure rules.
“Brooklyn prosecutors, working in the office of District Attorney Charles Hynes, claimed that Orthodox Jews are ‘unique’ in that releasing the names of suspects would allow others in the community to identify their victims.
“‘The circumstances here are unique,’ Assistant District Attorney Morgan Dennehy wrote in an April 16 letter to the Forward.Thank God that those Orthodox Jews are not Catholic priests.
“‘Because all of the requested defendant names relate to Hasidic men who are alleged to have committed sex crimes against Hasidic victims within a very tight-knit and insular Brooklyn community, there is a significant danger that the disclosure of the defendants’ names would lead members of that community to discern the identities of the victims.’”[28]
Moving on to the media, why doesn’t Ibrahim write articles about Sarah Silverman, whose tasteless comedy ranges from “fucking a cheese”[29] to “fucking kill” Christ?
In her own book, Silverman struggled mightily to respond to Bill Donahue’s complaint. Donahue declared that
“Silverman’s filthy diatribe would never be allowed if the chosen target were the Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem and the state of Israel.”[30]
How does the famous TV personality respond?
“And so I have finally come to understand that whatever I say, I should at least consider that some will view it through the filter of my Jewishness.”[31]
Silverman can silence her critics through her actions. Will she do that?[32]
Finally, if Ibrahim is going to write a book on Islam persecuting Christians, doesn’t he owe us an explanation as to why Christians are being mocked by Jewish comedians such as Larry David in Seinfeld? Will he write books on how Christians are being treated in Jerusalem?
A November 2009 Jerusalem Post article titled “Mouths Filled with Hatred” describes the situation:“For Christian clergy in the Old City, being spat at by Jewish fanatics ‘is a part of life,’ said the American Jewish Committee’s Rabbi David Rosen, Israel’s most prominent Jewish interfaith activist.”[33]
Although only infrequently brought to light in the media, these incidents are in fact increasingly common, sometimes even a daily occurrence.
“A senior Greek Orthodox clergyman in Israel attended a meeting at a government office in Jerusalem’s Givat Shaul quarter.
“When he returned to his car, an elderly man wearing a skullcap came and knocked on the window. When the clergyman let the window down, the passerby spat in his face.”[34]
The article asks the question, “Where are the police in all this?” One individual responded,
“The police tell us to catch them and bring them in, but then they tell us not to use violence, so how are we supposed to catch them?”
Another individual complained,
“The police say, ‘Show us the evidence.’ They want the Christians to photograph the people spitting at them so they can make arrests, but this is very unrealistic—by the time you get the camera out, the attack is over and there’s nothing to photograph.”[35]
In another incident, although the police witnessed the spitting personally, they did nothing about it.
“Early this year there were about 100 Orthodox Jewish boys who came past the church singing and dancing. The police were with them—I don’t know what the occasion was, maybe it was a holiday, maybe it had to do with the elections.
“There was a group of Franciscan monks standing in front of the church, and a few of the Jewish boys went up to the monks, spat on them, then went back into the crowd.
“I went up to a policeman and he told me, ‘Sorry about that, but look, they’re just kids.’ When confronted with these reports, the Jerusalem police spokesperson responded, ‘We don’t give interviews on relations between Jews and Christians in the Old City. We’re not sociologists, we’re policemen.’”[36]
There is no doubt that there is deep animus here, an issue clearly illustrated in 2002 when Israeli soldiers set fire to Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity and blamed the Palestinians for it. First, the Israeli military “accused Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat of orchestrating a fire and a gun battle” at the church.
Then “Israeli Lt. Col. Olivier Rafowicz also said that Palestinians have planted bombs and booby traps at the church, the site believed to be the place where Jesus was born.”[37]
Rafowicz defended the position that Israelis did not set the fire on the church, but eyewitness accounts disagree.
“Israeli soldiers tried to storm the building by a roof, opening fire and throwing stun grenades into the church compound. That ignited a fire in the church…
“The Franciscan pastor inside the church, Father Amjad Sabbara, told the BBC that the Palestinian man killed by the Israelis was not shooting at them but had been trying to douse the flames.
“The Israeli soldiers killed him because he was trying to extinguish the flames and save the church. After the Palestinian was murdered, the blaze burned for an hour before Israeli forces allowed firefighters access to extinguish it, destroying altar cloths and ceremonial cups and damaging mosaics inside the Basilica of St. Catherine.”[38]
To put these incidents in perspective, imagine the outrage that would occur if Christian youth in America burned copies of the Talmud, vandalized Jewish synagogues, or spat—even once—on an Orthodox Rabbi. In the face of incidents like these, how then can Rabbinic Judaism continue to claim that it is neutral or even victimized?
“Jewish Racism To Hate Arabs is not Racism, it is Values”
As it turns out, people like Ibrahim simply cannot handle the truth. Let me put it quite blunt: I am just appalled when I read many of the stuff that those people put out there—and so-called sophisticated people believe them!
Some of these people are so sophomoric in their thinking that I just wonder how they manage to graduate from college. It is sad to say that perhaps many of these people have never been exposed to rigorous argumentation, despite the fact that some of them have graduated from some of the best colleges in the country.
For example, when people around the world resisted Israel’s bombing of schools and civilians in Gaza, Seth Mandel of Commentary declared that the world needed to start getting comfortable “with Jewish self-defense.”[39] He continued,
“We are constantly told that you can criticize Israel without being anti-Semitic; this is undoubtedly true. Israeli officials are criticized in Israel as much as anywhere else.
“But the demonstrations claim to be in protest of Israeli policy or in the name of peace. That sounds awfully nice in theory. In practice, the demonstrators aren’t keen on making such distinctions.”[40]
The evidence for this preposterous idea? It was nowhere to be found. Now here is something you need to think about. Mandel cites the Times of Israel saying that “A pro-Gaza protest in London called for the elimination of Israel.”[41] I checked the source and here is what it actually said,
“Tens of thousands protested in London Saturday afternoon against Israel’s military operations in Gaza, denouncing Israel as a terrorist state and castigating British Prime Minister David Cameron for backing Israel’s right to self-defense against Hamas rocket fire.
“At one point, a woman on the podium shouted ‘from the river to the sea’ — a call for the elimination of Israel — and protesters responded by yelling ‘Palestine will be free.’”[42]
You see how both the Times of Israel and Mandel swiftly and subtly fabricate what the woman was saying? They both invent the phraseology “a call for the elimination of Israel” and then accused their opponents of doing just that!If that is not evil, what is?
Mandel and the Times of Israel simply cannot see a resistance force against the Israeli genocide in Gaza because to them that would be anti-Semitic.
But whether Ibrahim and others like it or not, people are simply tired of genocide. And if Ibrahim doesn’t believe that it is genocide, we will let them quarrel with Gilad Sharon, son of former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Sharon declared in 2012:
“We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. the residents of Gaza are not innocent, they elected Hamas.If Ibrahim cannot formulate a coherent argument against Sharon here, then Ibrahim is beyond political and intellectual redemption.
“The Gazans aren’t hostages; they chose this freely, and must live with the consequences. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too.
“There is no middle path here – either the Gazans and their infrastructure are made to pay the price, or we reoccupy the entire Gaza Strip. Otherwise there will be no decisive victory. And we’re running out of time – we must achieve victory quickly.
“The Netanyahu government is on a short international leash. Soon the pressure will start – and a million civilians can’t live under fire for long. This needs to end quickly – with a bang, not a whimper.”[43]
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment