We have moved to the new version this evening. The URL is still the same: israpundit.com, but the actual physical location on the server is israpundit.com/2006/ Both will get you to where you need to be.

NOTE: You will not be able to comment here. This version is now strictly for archival purposes.

This controversy has nothing to do with fairness or sensitivity. It has to do with the insistence of Islamists on the principle of the primacy of Islam, and a second-class status (dhimmi) for others. We do not understand this because the West cannot conceive that anyone could openly espouse inequality as a principle.

THIS IS EXCELLENT

Abdullah Badawi, Malaysia's prime minister, "says a huge chasm has opened between the West and Islam, fuelled by Muslim frustrations over Western foreign policy," according to the BBC, in a story about the Mohammed caricatures. The Beeb claims that Abdullah is "promoting a moderate form of Islam," but his anti-democratic actions prove otherwise. Au contraire, Mr. Abdullah, it is your seething, Muslim masses that are the cause of this "chasm." Again, the BBC:

"Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush. Destroy America," protesters shouted as they marched to the Danish embassy in the rain from a nearby mosque.

Abdullah has "shut down indefinitely a Borneo-based paper, the Sarawak Tribune, for reprinting the cartoons" and "declared possession of the cartoons illegal." Are these the actions of a moderate? Malaysians chanting "Destroy Denmark" -- moderate voices?

In today's Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer reminds us of careless use of the M-word (for "moderate"):

God save us from the voices of reason.

What passes for moderation in the Islamic community -- "I share your rage but don't torch that embassy" -- is nothing of the sort. It is simply a cynical way to endorse the goals of the mob without endorsing its means. It is fraudulent because, while pretending to uphold the principle of religious sensitivity, it is interested only in this instance of religious insensitivity.

Have any of these "moderates" ever protested the grotesque caricatures of Christians and, most especially, Jews that are broadcast throughout the Middle East on a daily basis? The sermons on Palestinian TV that refer to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys? The Syrian prime-time TV series that shows rabbis slaughtering a gentile boy to ritually consume his blood? The 41-part (!) series on Egyptian TV based on that anti-Semitic czarist forgery (and inspiration of the Nazis), "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," showing the Jews to be engaged in a century-old conspiracy to control the world?

A true Muslim moderate is one who protests desecrations of all faiths.

In case you were wondering, and since seeing is believing, here are some examples of the "grotesque caricatures" to which Krauthammer refers (from the ADL):

Daniel Pipes aptly points out:

...will Westerners accede to a double standard by which Muslims are free to insult Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism, while Muhammad, Islam, and Muslims enjoy immunity from insults? Muslims routinely publish cartoons far more offensive than the Danish ones. Are they entitled to dish it out while being insulated from similar indignities?

What is not frightening is a "Western foreign policy" that is working. What is frightening is to realize that many Muslims do not even know what the letter of the term, "freedom of expression," means, let alone the spirit. All this violence because a Danish newspaper published caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed. Islamists murder 30,000 Iraqi civilians, and the Muslim world is silent.

The Muslim silence over true atrocities speaks volumes to the current state of their culture. It is the better person/society that can sit at ease as symbols are burned or defamed. It is the primitive person/society that lashes out with anger in such situations.

Those who are burning embassies or killing civilians in terrorist acts have no true convictions. Their thinking is dominated by hatred, fear, and anger, the basest of emotions. If they held firm beliefs, they wouldn't give a hoot about what some newspaper published. If they truly believed in Mohammed's teachings, with true faith, there wouldn't have been a 9/11.

People who worry solely about "cultural sensitivities" are missing the point. German fascists, and Russian and Chinese communists, killed 100 million people in the last century. Do we bury this history for fear of offending the current generation of Germans, Russians, and Chinese? Will this history cause irreparable damage to their "self-esteem?"

In the current century, it is radical Muslims ("Islamists") who are carrying out the atrocities to end all atrocities, and who are justifying the means towards an end -- that end being the destruction of Western civilization and forceful imposition of a worldwide Islamic caliphate.

What is frightening is that some in the West are helping the Islamo-fascists to succeed:

• The editor of Jyllands-Posten, the newspaper which first published the cartoons, is sent on leave for an indefinite period, as the editor of a Norwegian magazine that reprinted them apologises
• A Swedish internet service provider shuts down the website of a right-wing anti-immigrant party which invited readers to send in cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad

The questions Westerners should be asking themselves are: How do I want to live -- under tyranny or freedom? Or do I and my children sacrifice our freedoms all in the interest of "cultural sensitivities?"

Source: http://www.iris.org.il/blog/

by Bill Levinson

Dr. Daniel Porterfield, VP for Communications at Georgetown University, stated clearly and openly on the Bill O'Reilly program (9 February 2006) that Georgetown University has no interest in allowing terror supporters on campus. If the Palestinian Solidarity Movement's alleged ties to terror were demonstrated to the University, "that would be very significant, yes," he said. We'd need to know what the exact facts were of course. We have no interest at Georgetown University in allowing people to come to campus who are supporters of terrorism."

O'Reilly: "If ties to terror were proven- if what [Lee] says is true..."

Porterfield: "...would be very significant, yes. We'd need to know what the exact facts were of course. We have no interest at Georgetown University in allowing people to come to campus who are supporters of terrorism."

(@ has been removed from the quoted E-mail addresses below to prevent harvesting by spam software that crawls Web sites for addresses). Note that Dr. Porterfield was copied on both E-mails so he is aware that Bill O'Reilly also has been provided with the information package in question.

To: bill.oreilly foxnews.com CC: editor thehoya.com, news thehoya.com, porterfd georgetown.edu

Dear Mr. O'Reilly, cc: the Georgetown Hoya and Fox News

Last night, Dr. Porterfield promised on behalf of Georgetown University that, if a connection between the Palestine Solidarity Movement and terrorism was shown, it would "be very significant, yes," and that Georgetown University "does not have an interest" in allowing terror supporters on campus.

It is on record that President DeGioia and Georgetown's Directors received the attached information package on January 23 by certified mail. Dr. Porterfield is on copy to this letter to verify to Mr. O'Reilly that he has personally been provided with the information in question.

--Bill Levinson
[phone number given]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Palestine Solidarity Movement and terrorism/ O'Reilly show
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 15:21:54 -0500
From: William A. Levinson
To: porterfd georgetown.edu
CC: president georgetown.edu, ems62 georgetown.edu, Lee Kaplan

Dear Dr. Porterfield (cc: President DeGioia, Eric Smulson, and Lee
Kaplan, and posted to IsraPundit),

I enjoyed your appearance on the O'Reilly Factor last night and I
appreciate your pledge on Georgetown's behalf to take a second look at
the Palestine Solidarity Movement conference if connections to terrorism were ever shown. The attached document was delivered to President DeGioia and Georgetown's Directors on January 23:

Per usps.com, Label/Receipt Number: 7003 3110 0004 5841 5831
Status: Delivered
Your item was delivered at 11:38 am on January 23, 2006 in WASHINGTON,
DC 20057.

Although President DeGioia and the Directors now know about ISM/PSM's
background, you were not named specifically on the distribution list and I am not sure you saw it. I have therefore attached a copy for your benefit. It contains a very explicit description of how a PSM activist, Susan Barclay, concealed a terrorist in Israel-- an act that would be a felony if committed in the United States. In addition, the document shows numerous examples of the organization's advocacy of terroristic violence.

In addition, you were on the distribution list for the document that
outlines how the Palestine Solidarity Movement may be planning to use
Georgetown facilities to conspire to violate Federal anti-boycott laws, as described by Boycott Watch and the Zionist Organization of America.

Please feel free to contact me at any time if you want more information.

Regards,

Bill Levinson
[phone number given]

*

"(4) PSM spokesman Nadeem Muaddi wrote a column that asks Christians to step forward as "martyrs" for the Palestinian cause. The Georgetown Hoya (January 27 2006) reports this: "But Muaddi declined to condemn suicide bombings, saying that it would not be right 'to criticize Palestinians for taking part in violence when the Israeli forces are taking part in violence.'"

The most significant items are as follows:

Advocacy and Facilitation of Terroristic Violence

Advocacy of Terrorism
(1) "Fadi Kiblawi is far from being an outspoken critic of terrorism. While an undergrad at U. Mich., he sponsored the national convention of the Palestine Solidarity Movement, a group that is on record endorsing terror bombing as a legitimate tool of Palestinian "resistance." Furthermore, Mr. Kiblawi actually wrote an article in a U. Michigan student publication in which he expressed his desire "to strap a bomb to one's chest and kill. …The enemy is not just overseas, the enemy is also amongst us."
o A Google search for "strap a bomb to one's chest and kill" should allow independent verification of this information. See also http://www.dafka.org/NewsGen.asp?S=4&PageID=945
(2) New Jersey Solidarity leader Charlotte Kates refuses to condemn terrorist bombings and defines Israeli children as legitimate targets.
o http://www.thejewishpress.com/news_article.asp?article=2709
"Charlotte Kates, the organizer of the New Jersey Solidarity Movement— an offshoot of the International Solidarity Movement— has refused to condemn homicide bombings and other means of 'armed resistance.'"
o http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=944
Charlotte Kates has said that Israeli CHILDREN are "legitimate" targets for Palestinian suicide bombers.
o http://home.comcast.net/~jat.action/ISM_info.htm "ISM organizers, however, occasionally forget to speak in code and actually say precisely what they mean. Charlotte Kates, leader of the New Jersey chapter of the ISM and organizer of the ISM's third National Convention, scheduled to take place on the Rutgers campus from October 10-12, explained that the ISM supports suicide bombing. "We support Palestinians' right to resist occupation and oppression, and do not feel that it is our place as a solidarity movement to dictate tactics of resistance to the Palestinian people. Why is there something particularly horrible about 'suicide bombing' - except for the extreme dedication conveyed in the resistance fighter's willingness to use his or her own body to fight?" (2003 by MidEastWeb and Ami Isseroff)
(3) Two of the ISM's leaders, Adam Shapiro and Huwaida Arraf, defended the use of violence against Israelis in a January 2002 article in the Palestine Chronicle:
o http://palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20020129050221695
"In actuality, nonviolence is not enough. Rather, what is needed is nonviolent direct action against the occupation." "The Palestinian resistance must take on a variety of characteristics— both nonviolent and violent. But most importantly it must develop a strategy involving both aspects. No other successful nonviolent movement was able to achieve what it did without a concurrent violent movement. In India militants attacked British outposts and interests while Gandhi conducted his campaign, while the Black Panther Movement and its earlier incarnations existed side-by-side with the Civil Rights Movement in the United States."
o http://home.comcast.net/~jat.action/ISM_essay_ref12.htm
"Nevertheless, he [Shapiro] justifies the Palestinian armed resistance against Israel as long as it is targeting Israeli soldiers and Jewish settlers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Otherwise, he is not in favor of suicide bombings." Settlers are civilians so he is advocating the suicide bombing of civilians. Furthermore, even soldiers are legitimate targets only for other soldiers and partisans who carry their weapons openly and wear uniforms or badges "distinguishable at a distance."

Safe House Assistance to Terrorists and Interference with Law Enforcement
(1) http://home.comcast.net/~jat.action/ISM_info.htm "Susan Barclay, the ISM organizer deported by Israel after she hid Islamic Jihad terrorist Shadi Sukiya in the ISM office in Jenin, told the Seattle Post Intelligencer that, "she knowingly worked with representatives from Hamas and Islamic Jihad— terrorist groups that sponsor suicide bombings and exist, according to their charters, to demolish the Jewish state entirely." (Seattle Post Intelligencer, Thursday March 20, 2003, "Activist's death focuses spotlight on Mideast struggle," By Sam Skolnik, Seattle Post-Intelligencer reporter.)
(2) http://israelbehindthenews.com/Archives/Jul-04-03.htm#agitate
"Days before a British suicide bomber detonated an explosives belt in Mike's Place, a bar in suburban Tel Aviv, the bomber and an associate took tea with members of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a pro-Palestinian group that promotes non-violent resistance to Israeli occupation."
(3) http://home.comcast.net/~jat.action/ISM_info.htm "The immediate goal of the ISM is to hamper the ability of the IDF to prevent terrorist attacks on civilians." "The ISM sees itself as working in tandem with the terrorist organizations: Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade. Those organizations use violent means, while the ISM undertakes such aggressive non-violent actions as blocking the progress of Israeli soldiers on their way to arrest terrorists. The intention of the ISM in these actions is to protect terrorists from interference by the IDF."
o Hamas is a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) as defined by the U.S. State Department.

Recruitment of American college students as human shields
In March 2003, Evergreen College student and peace activist Rachel Corrie was killed in an accident with an Israeli bulldozer. Disturbing statements by ISM director George Rishmawi and a Hamas terrorist suggest that ISM/PSM had a motive for wanting Ms. Corrie dead.

(1) http://www.standwithus.com/news_post.asp?NPI=85 "Recently, the Director of the Solidarity Movement, George Rishmawi, explained to the San Francisco Chronicle that the recruitment of American student volunteers is useful to the Palestinian Movement because "if some of these foreign volunteers get shot or even killed, then the international media will sit up and take notice.""
(2) Joseph Smith, who was present when Corrie died and whose highest priority was apparently to take pictures, said "The spirit that she died for is worth a life. This idea of resistance, this spirit of resisting this brutal occupying force, is worth anything. And many, many, many Palestinians give their lives for it all the time. So the life of one international, I feel, is more than worth the spirit of resisting oppression." (http://www.freepalestinecampaign.org/Stranger article.htm, a source friendly to the Palestine Solidarity Movement,)
(3) "'Her [Rachel Corrie's] death serves me more than it served her,' said one activist at a Hamas funeral yesterday. '...Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs.'" Making of a Martyr by Sandra Jordan, Guardian Newspapers (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-22-2003-37821.asp)
(4) ISM/PSM spokesman Nadeem Muaddi asks Christians to face "martyrdom" for the Palestinian cause. July. 30. 2005 "A Call for Christian Martyrdom" by Nadeem Muaddi (http://ramallahonline.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2257 and other sources, copy enclosed).
o "Indeed, to become a true martyr, one must contribute equally to “witnessing in word, witnessing in deed, and exposing oneself to danger, whatever the cost”. If this “cost” so happens to be death, then one will have become a martyr. However, to simply kill one's self in a desperate act of hopelessness does not constitute martyria, but murder – a sin against God in all three Abrahamic faiths."
o "Bishop Younan faithfully claims that “Martyria is the Via Dolorosa with resurrection”. If this interpretation of “a theology of martyria” is correct, then it’s about time more Christians step forward and offer themselves up as martyrs for a true and just resolution to the Palestinian Issue."

When challenged to explain what he meant by "martyrs," Mr. Muaddi provided the unlikely example of a firefighter who died while saving a baby from a fire. The word's context in "A Call for Christian Martyrdom" suggests that he means human shields, noting that if the cost of witnessing for the Palestinian cause in word and deed "so happens to be death, then one will have become a martyr." My personal opinion is that Rachel Corrie was one such martyr too many.

The package also includes clear and convincing evidence that shows that the Palestine Solidarity Movement and International Solidarity Movement are basically the same organization.

Following its election victory Hamas faces a problem that has no easy solution: How is it going to displace Fatah and control the Palestinians without setting off a civil war?

After all, Mahmoud Abbas will probably stay on as nominal leader of the Palestinian Authority until his term ends in three years. Since he has been powerless from the beginning, the election results will certainly reinforce his practical irrelevance. Abbas's value, however, lies in international public relations, providing a rationale for the PA to claim - and part of the West to accept - that the PA is relatively moderate.

Wasn't there daily incitement in the official media, schools, and mosque sermons to kill Israelis and wipe Israel off the face of the earth? The Western media didn't report it. How about continual efforts to assist - or at least not discourage - hundreds of terrorist attacks? Much of the world gave the PA and its Fatah rulers a free pass.

Hamas will not find this pattern as easy to duplicate, but it will certainly be possible to succeed here, if in fewer places. And having a powerless Abbas still at his post will aid these efforts. Ironically, it will now be left to a Hamas-dominated regime supposedly to stop terrorism and disarm the armed militias - that is, mainly Hamas itself!

Already Hamas leaders have put forward a proposed solution to this problem: the formation of a national army. There would be no more militias or armed terrorists, merely the Palestinian armed forces in which Fatah and Hamas people serve side by side.
But this conversion to a conventional military also has a problem: For if the Palestinian army starts battling Israel on a regular basis and Palestinian soldiers are blowing themselves up trying to kill Israeli civilians, perhaps someone will hold the PA directly responsible for terrorism?

Yet the Palestinian army idea reflects Hamas's number-one need right now: getting control of Palestinian institutions and obtaining jobs and salaries for its people.

THERE ARE two problems. First, what are the Fatah people who lose their jobs going to do, and, second, who is going to pay for it? This is not merely a matter of the security forces. Every PA government ministry - the media, the PA-controlled monopolies, and so on - is full of people who are there to collect salaries in exchange for supporting Fatah. This is the house that Yasser Arafat built, and it is a very rickety house indeed.

The PA is an internationally funded welfare state (Palestinians pay no general taxes) based on government employment. Generally, those receiving a salary do nothing much to earn it. Thus money is funneled into political patronage rather than economic development. After receiving billions of dollars of international aid over a dozen years the PA has made zero progress on building a productive economy or raising living standards.

Of course for Fatah, as for Hamas, this is not important. The only important thing is to mobilize the long-term struggle against Israel and muster as much international support for it as possible. Even Hamas's much-discussed welfare measures have amounted mainly to supporting its own cadre, providing for the families of dead terrorists, and creating institutions where it can find recruits.

But if Hamas pushes out tens of thousands of Fatah, or at least nationalist, employees and replaces them with an equal number of Hamas, or at least Islamist, ones, those who are laid off will pick up guns and start shooting. Even under Fatah disappointed office-seekers (a term used in the 19th century for people who had assassinated at least two US presidents) regularly rioted, seized offices and kidnapped people.

THERE IS, however, an easy and tempting solution, and perhaps the only possible one. Keep all the Fatah employees and add on a huge number of Hamas people. In administrative and economic terms this would be a total waste, but in political terms - which is all that is important to Fatah and Hamas - it's a brilliant strategy.

True, the PA budget would be unable to pay these people regularly, but their loyalty would be ensured and they would be paid occasionally, which is what was anyway happening in the PA bureaucracy in past years.

Donors will have to decide whether to finance such fiscal irresponsibility while knowing that their money is subsidizing Hamas terrorists' training and operations. Aid funds can go to the Ministry of the Interior's Missile Factory Number One, which builds rockets to fire at Israeli civilians; or to a Ministry of Education that teaches the necessity of holy war on Israel, the glory of being a suicide bomber, the natural evil of the Jews, and so on.

Another method Hamas can use to conciliate Fatah is to stage joint attacks on Israel. The well-established practice of Palestinian politics is that the best way to defuse internal conflicts is to join hands in hating and trying to kill the enemy.

Whatever it does, Hamas must deal with its Fatah problem before doing anything else. In this context, though, Hamas has an even greater incentive to continue its hard-line position, which is about the same as the mainstream Fatah stance, because it has no other way of bringing about the minimal unity needed to avoid either civil war or the PA's collapse.

Thus, the difference between a "moderate" and "radical" Hamas regime comes down to this: The former will merely prepare for a war to destroy Israel, while the latter will try, albeit ineffectively, to wage it.

The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs.

Although Indymedia (San Francisco Bay, Indybay.org) claims to be an "open forum," it is now quite obvious that it is a propaganda organ for left-wing causes and is subject to Stalinist censorship by its "Collective." Proof of this Stalinist censorship appears below and should tell the general public just how much of a "news" source Indymedia really is.

* The post or comment constitutes abuse of the newswire (see note below);
* The post or comment undermines the Principles of Unity of the SF Bay Area IMC; e.g., right-wing propaganda or hate speech; or
* The post or comment constitutes a spam attack (see below) on the newswire.

...The phrase "abuse of the newswire" is necessarily vague. Editorial collective participants each have different conceptions of what this means, so each proposal to hide/edit posts or comments will be taken on a case-by-case basis.

Yes, just like the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell's 1984 and Squealer the Pig in Animal Farm. As stated on their own page, "abuse of the newswire" is "necessarily vague" which means they can make up any rules they want, whenever they want. And they did.

Needless to say, the following article is not spam, right-wing propaganda, or hate speech; in fact, it quotes material almost-exclusively from the International Solidarity Movement and sources friendly to it. It is quite clear that the following posting was taken offline simply because the left-wing "collective" that runs Indymedia did not like facts that might cast a less-than-favorable light on the International Solidarity Movement.

The following post has status hidden:

Justice for Rachel Corrie
by WingedHussar1683 • Wednesday, Feb. 08, 2006 at 11:40 PM

Rachel Corrie (1979-2003) was killed in an accident with an Israeli bulldozer in front of which the International Solidarity Movement (also known as the Palestine Solidarity Movement in the United States) had encouraged her to kneel. There are some very disturbing things that would-be peace activists should know before involving themselves with the Palestine Solidarity Movement.

corrie_ism.jpglswcsd.jpg, image/jpeg, 640x370

(1) The International Solidarity Movement and Hamas are on record as stating openly that they had a motive for wanting Rachel Corrie dead.

http://www.standwithus.com/news_post.asp?NPI=85 "Recently, the Director of the Solidarity Movement, George Rishmawi, explained to the San Francisco Chronicle that the recruitment of American student volunteers is useful to the Palestinian Movement because "if some of these foreign volunteers get shot or even killed, then the international media will sit up and take notice.""

Joseph Smith, who was present when Corrie died and whose highest priority was apparently to take pictures, said "The spirit that she died for is worth a life. This idea of resistance, this spirit of resisting this brutal occupying force, is worth anything. And many, many, many Palestinians give their lives for it all the time. So the life of one international, I feel, is more than worth the spirit of resisting oppression." (http://www.freepalestinecampaign.org/Stranger article.htm, a source friendly to the Palestine Solidarity Movement. If he really feels that way, incidentally, why didn't he kneel in front of the bulldozer? Why was it worth Rachel's life but not his own?)

A Hamas terrorist said openly that Rachel was worth more dead than alive. "'Her death serves me more than it served her,' said one activist at a Hamas funeral yesterday. '...Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs.'" "Making of a Martyr" by Sandra Jordan, Guardian Newspapers (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-22-2003-37821.asp.

When you are more useful to your friends dead than you are alive, it is time to find new friends— quickly.

(2) Several ISM activists testified vigorously about their eyewitness accounts of Rachel's death but not one of them, by their own accounts, lifted a finger to pull her out of the slowly-moving bulldozer's path.
Per "Making of a Martyr" by Sandra Jordan, Guardian Newspapers (http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-22-2003-37821.asp, "Her British friend and fellow activist, Tom Dale, 18, from Lichfield in Staffordshire, said he saw her die. First, he said, there was fear on her face as she realised that her defiant gesture was going wrong. Joe Smith, 21, who went to college with Corrie, said that, although they acknowledged the danger, they saw death as a 'small, unlikely, potential risk'."

"Dale watched as she knelt down in front of the bulldozer, perhaps 20 metres away, something the activists had done repeatedly that day as they had in the past. 'The bulldozer went towards her, very slowly, she was fully in clear view, straight in front of them.'"

He testifies that the bulldozer was moving very slowly— plenty of time for him or another man to pull her out of its path when it became clear that (for whatever reason) it was not going to stop. Not one of the ISM activists even claims to have tried.

"A traumatised Smith raised his camera and took photographs: Rachel standing in front of the bulldozer; then her bloodied body being pulled from the freshly turned soil; being cradled in the arms of her friends."

Why was his first priority to raise his camera and take pictures instead of trying to get Rachel out of the bulldozer's path?

"'If only they'd had a video camera,' one Palestinian journalist lamented. 'A film of the Israelis killing an American in cold blood would have ended the intifada.'"

The Palestinian journalist's primary lament is that they didn't have a video camera— and not that someone didn't pull Rachel out of the bulldozer's path.

ISM member Tom Dale's testimony, from the ISM's own Web site (http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/2003/03/17/the-closest-eye-witness-account-on-the-murder-of-rachel-corrie/ highlighting and bracketed comments are mine) says that he was standing only 10 meters, only ten long paces, from Rachel when it happened but he does not even claim to have tried to get her out of the bulldozer's path when it became clear that something was going horribly wrong with her act of civil disobedience.

"Many of you will [have] heard varying accounts of the death of Rachel Corrie, maybe others will have heard nothing of it. Regardless, I was 10 metres away when it happened 2 days ago, and this is the way it went. …The bulldozer drove toward Rachel slowly, gathering earth in its scoop as it went." [If the bulldozer was demolishing houses, why bother to scoop up earth? Why not just drive through the houses?]

Dale also testifies that Rachel died in the ambulance of massive brain hemorrhaging but http://www.voicesofpalestine.org/outrageous/rachelcorrie.asp says, "Palestinian doctors try to save the life of Rachel Corrie at the Najar hospital in the southern Gaza town of Rafah." Somebody somewhere is not getting their story straight.

(3) At least one of the ISM's pictures may be a photomanipulated fake

The ISM posted a picture of Rachel Corrie in a bright red jacket confronting a giant bulldozer with a man named "Nick" nearby in a white T shirt. There are some strange things about this photograph.

The sun is obviously coming from behind the bulldozer, as shown by the shadow of its hydraulic piston on the back of the bulldozer blade. Rachel, however, casts a shadow to her left (the bulldozer's right) instead of behind her (the direction indicated by the shadow on the back of the bulldozer blade). The bulldozer casts no shadow at all to its right (Rachel's left), and neither does the man next to her.

The man appears to have been cut and pasted into the picture; he has no feet and he is standing almost as if he is kicking a soccer ball— a very odd pose indeed.

Furthermore, the Electronic Intifada reports, "Picture taken between 3:00-4:00PM, 16 March 2003, Rafah, Occupied Gaza. Rachel Corrie (L) and Nick (R) oppose the potential destruction of this home (to the west of the Doctor's home where Rachel was killed). The shadow to Rachel's left is shorter than her height, which is not consistent with late afternoon in mid-winter.

The same picture shows, incidentally, that the huge bulldozer blade would have prevented the driver from seeing a person who was standing (let alone kneeling) directly in front of it. ISM's own photographic evidence— if accepted as genuine and not a photomanipulated fraud— therefore gives the lie to the Palestine Solidarity Movement's statement that the driver saw Rachel and ran over her anyway. If it is a photomanipulated fraud, then ISM/PSM is guilty of perjury in the court of public opinion and should be judged accordingly.

While the picture should be examined by an expert, we must conclude, on the basis of the evidence shown here:

The ISM Lied and Rachel Died

=================================

On the other hand, the editors had no problem with leaving a personal (albeit puerile and grasping-at-straws) attack on Lee Kaplan by "Ehud A." online.

The Rachel Corrie article was posted in good faith and not to set up Indybay.org to be discredited for Stalinist censorship and spin. The Indybay "collective" made the latter choice for itself by taking the article offline. As a result, it is eminently clear that Indybay.org is little better than a far-left blog and should be regarded as such by impartial viewers.

Debka describes the Israeli and American governments' failings, culminating in Vladmir Putin inviting Hamas leaders to Moscow, and concludes as follows:

My reaction to this item is, "So what? What is so bad about that?" Does Israel really have reason to be upset that a hard-line "government" has taken over the Pals? Haven't they just basically tossed away their last chance at statehood?

Isn't it possible that maybe Israel wanted a Hamas rise to power?

I'm just raising the question. Personally I think the Hamas ascendancy is a good thing for Israel. It certainly is from a propaganda standpoint. Sure, Hamas is going to get some international recognition and support -- but international support in the pre-1980 no-negotiation days didn't move the Palestinian one millimeter toward a state.

Just curious to know what others thing about this. Fire away....

Antonia Zerbisias claims that Israpundit, of which I am the Editor, leads the “Cartoon Crusade” because it is motivated by hate. This derives from her belief that Israpundit, or its contributing authors, “hate Muslims”.

With all due respect we hate what some Muslims do, including suicide bombings, brutal beheadings, incitement of hatred, unbridled propagation of anti-Semitism, honour killings, discrimination against gays Christians and Jews and female genital mutilations to name just a few. I am sure that many Muslims also hate these acts. Yet these acts are done according to Sharia and supported by the Islamic states and Imams to varying degrees. Furthermore these acts are done in the name of Mohammed or in praise of Allah.

The Arabs have attempted to destroy Israel ever since its creation and continually attack it. (The conflict is not over Israel’s borders but over Israel’s existence.) To achieve this end they have vilified and demonized Israel. No lie is too big for them to invent. No atrocity is too horrendous to commit. The election of Hamas is ample proof of this.

Israpundit simply points out these truths. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. We would like nothing better for all the carnage, caused by Muslims, to end including the cartoon carnage done by “out-of-control Muslim mobs”. In fact these Muslim mobs are in the control of Islamists and doing their bidding on cue as the present evidence proves.

But beyond that, Israpundit is motivated by its desire to preserve the West from the danger Islam represents to it. This danger is not just a military one but one of dhimmitude (i.e. subservience) out of fear. We are not looking for, or in need of, “another reason to bash Muslims and sow further divisions between what are already "clashing civilizations." as she alleges. We fear the West is being cowered into submission and we want to sound the clarion call.

To her credit, she writes, “I would hate to think that newspapers are backing away to avoid angry protests, to prevent ad boycotts, out of political correctness or a sense that some communities should get special treatment or, most of all, because they fear violent reprisals.” We agree.

But there is another issue that we champion beyond that of free speech, namely the right to live by our own values and not be dictated to by Islamists. In response to the joint statement of conciliation by the US and the EU, "Nasrallah (Hezbollah leader) said there would be no compromise before Denmark apologizes and the European Parliament and individual assemblies in Europe pass laws that prohibit insulting the Prophet." This is outrageous. It is an attempt to force Sharia and Dhimmitude on the west and should be totally resisted.

To mount a proper defence the West must be free to criticize Islam and its values and practices that we find abhorrent. We cannot allow ourselves to be silenced by charges of racism or hate or by the dictates of politically correct speech. We all have a duty to speak out. If we don’t, how can we expect moderate Muslims to stand up to them.

Ms Zerbisias then makes a totally unsubstantiated guess, “As for violence, I would guess that Muslims are more victims than perpetrators.” If she has to guess she shouldn’t say anything. The facts, which she ignores, speak otherwise.

Finally she gives the Arabs or Muslims a pass because they don’t have modern communications and are “easily subject to the machinations of ignorant clerics”. She goes on to suggest that either we are ‘the real hate mongers” or “that[we]should know better”. In fact, as a result modern communications, we do know better and therefore work to spread the truth and warn of the dangers.

Contrary to her assertion, there is every "need to publish offensive cartoons".

Civilization's defenders have previously used reactive and defensive tactics to counteract the International Solidarity Movement's fifth column activities in the United States and abroad. A few months ago, the rules changed drastically and we are playing an entirely new ball game. The issue in the coming week is not whether the ISM will hold its annual anti-Israel hatefest at Georgetown University, but rather how the ISM will be destroyed as an organization.

If we use the standard convention of red for bad guys and blue for good guys, we see here the usual situation. The bad guys take the offensive and dictate the rules under which the conflict will be fought. The good guys do their best to try to stop the bad guys from breaking through and achieving their objectives.

The basic truth is, however, that no one ever won a war by defending himself. You win by destroying or capturing what Carl von Clausewitz called the enemy's center of gravity, which can differ depending on whom you are fighting. In Clausewitz's time, it was usually the enemy's capital but, in the case of Prussia under Frederick the Great, it was the Prussian Army. The then-defunct Polish Commonwealth's capital was definitely not its center of gravity because the Swedes' capture of Warsaw in 1655-1656 did not break the country's will to resist. (It was speculated that the fortified monastery at Czestochowa was the predominanty-Catholic nation's center of gravity and that the capture of the Black Madonna might have broken the people's will to resist-- then again, it might have simply enraged them.)

It is also well known that Russia's major cities are not its center of gravity either, noting that Napoleon's capture of Moscow did not enable him to make a favorable peace. Nor, for that matter, did Britain's sacking of Washington DC during the War of 1812 force the United States to capitulate. Each adversary has its own center(s) of gravity. In the International Solidarity Movement's case, these are:

(1) Its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt funding sources
(2) The commitment of its rank-and-file. (Destruction of this commitment almost invariably leads to the organization's collapse).

Its public credibility also is among its key assets but destruction of this credibility is not likely to be immediately fatal to the organization.

Now it seems that pro-Civilization organizations have to fight the International Solidarity Movement year after year, e.g. at Duke, Rutgers [cancelled], Ohio State, University of Michigan, and now Georgetown University. The usual procedure, as shown above, is entirely defensive. Counterdemonstrators and columnists protest the event, defend Israel's right to exist and protect itself from terrorists, and so on. This plays straight into the Arab strategy of wearing down an enemy through a drawn-out death of a thousand cuts.

The problem at our end is not lack of resources but lack of will. A good historical analogue is the Polish Commonwealth, which possessed an invincible military instrument. However, due to internal squabbles and indecisiveness, Poland lacked the will to use its army when it should have been used and sometimes used it when it should not have been used. A uninanimous vote of the Sejm (Parliament) was in fact required to get anything done at all.

We must instead choose as our role model that described in Carl von Clausewitz's On War.

Woe to the government which, relying on half-hearted politics and a shackled military policy, meets a foe who, like the untamed elements, knows no law other than his own power! Any defect of action and effort will turn to the advantage of the enemy.

We must become that entity that knows no law other than its own power. We must not try to hold ground against an endless series of onslaughts by the enemy; as General Patton said,

I don't want to get any messages saying that, "We are holding out position." We're not holding anything! Let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly and we're not interested in holding on to anything except the enemy. We're going to hold on to him by the nose and we're going to kick him in the ass; we're going to go through him like crap through a goose.

To which Saint George added,

We'll win this war, but we'll win it only by fighting and by showing the Germans that we've got more guts than they have; or ever will have. We're not going to just shoot the sons-of-b*tches, we're going to rip out their living Godd*mned guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks.

This is the attitude we must adopt toward our legal, nonviolent, and socially-acceptable means of destroying the International Solidarity Movement. Now take a look at the following diagram and see if you like it better than the first one:

Even while the Palestine Solidarity Movement is gearing up for its annual hatefest at Georgetown, the offensives shown are in progress. They could go to Georgetown and, upon coming home, find that they have lost a good part of their financial infrastructure.

Meanwhile, our side has already taken the offensive on the Rachel Corrie issue. Ms. Corrie is no longer their side's doe-eyed peace martyr who was "murdered" by Israel and a Caterpillar bulldozer, she is our side's doe-eyed peace martyr whom the ISM may have even set up to be killed. We have not defended ourselves against the enemy attack depicted above, we have smashed through the attackers and are now on the offensive ourselves. This is how you win a war (or a political issue). Defense? We don't NEED no stinkin' defense!

This picture shows that our side has seized the "Justice for Rachel Corrie" banner from ISM/PSM and is now using it to attack ISM/PSM.

Now here are some downloadable royalty-free leaflets for deployment at the Georgetown conference. Anyone is free to print these, copy as many as they like, and hand them out to the Georgetown community and the media. These leaflets discuss issues that have been online and publicly-viewable by ISM/PSM for some time so they are not giving anything away. If there are any other issues, ISM/PSM will find out about them when it is convenient for our side to let them find out.

Downloadable royalty-free leaflets, single-sided

The International Solidarity Movement. ISM founders Adam Shapiro and Huwaidi Arraf explain the Palestinian resistance strategy in their own words. (Warning: graphic cartoon violence).

The International Solidarity Movement's Olive Harvest. Picture of a terrorist picking grenades from an olive tree, with supporting text included.

Downloadable royalty-free leaflets, double-sided (Word for Windows, intended for duplex copying)

Justice for Rachel Corrie: "When you are more useful to your friends dead than alive, it is time to find new friends-- quickly."

ISM/PSM advocacy and facilitation of terroristic violence. Also recruitment of human shields; for distribution to the general public and the media.

In summary, it is no longer a question of whether the Georgetown conference will go ahead next week. If it doesn't, it will be a humiliating public relations disaster for ISM/PSM because it will be clear that Georgetown wants no part of a pariah hate cult-- whether it is ISM/PSM or the Ku Klux Klan. Such a disaster will be followed up with a public-relations pursuit until ISM/PSM ceases to be a problem. If the conference proceeds, it will still be a public relations disaster.

The only rules now are that our side knows only the law of its own power. We will see just how well taqqiya, double-dealing, and lying work in this entirely new ball game.

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
Let pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it
As fearfully as doth a galled rock
O'erhang and jutty his confounded base,
Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height. On, on, you noblest English.
Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof!
Fathers that, like so many Alexanders,
Have in these parts from morn till even fought
And sheathed their swords for lack of argument:
Dishonour not your mothers; now attest
That those whom you call'd fathers did beget you.
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman,
Whose limbs were made in England, show us here
The mettle of your pasture; let us swear
That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not;
For there is none of you so mean and base,
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'

King Henry V, Act 2

"[...] Yes, there is a 100 year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is. The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel. The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel. The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilian in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel. Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endangered Saudi Arabia and butchered his own people because of Israel. Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of Israel. Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in one week in El Hamma in Syria because of Israel. The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel. The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with Israel, and I could go on and on and on.

The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel would have joined the Arab league and an independent Palestine would have existed for 100 years.[...]"

by Beryl Wajsman, Institute for Public Affairs of Montreal

"It is evident that we must protect freedom of _expression."
~ Nicolas Sarkozy, French Interior Minister

"The civil administration shall take no cognizance of religion."
~ James Madison, "The Federalist Papers"

"In European countries, with a large or growing Moslem minority, there is a real fear that behind the demand for respect hides another agenda: the threat that everyone must adjust to the rules of Islam."
~ Dutch newspaper editorial from NRC Handelsblad

"I prefer mass caricature to mass censorship." With these words French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy boldly stated the case for western liberal pluralism over eastern theocratic tyranny.

Immigrants, from whatever country or race or creed cannot descend on the industrialized west hoping to improve their economic conditions and at the same time demanding, in the case of Moslems, that the west abandon centuries of freedom for the statist faith their religious demands dictate. If they want financial benefits from our free economies, they must also respect the liberties of our free polities.

The lack of ability of many Moslems to acculturate and acclimatize to the west has less to do with the color of their skin than with the content of their character. Their radical leaders incite the broad base of the faithful to believe that freedom of religion implies state sanction of their parochial particularities and state surrender for redress to any perceived slight. This is their great failing. And this is their greatest threat to us.

Freedom of religion guarantees only that everyone has a right to worship in their own fashion without restriction or resistance from any state authority. Conversely, that freedom also implies that all people must have the freedom to be let alone from religion if they so choose, without any coercion from any group. Freedom of religion does not imply, nor has it ever implied, state support for religious sects, institutions or any restrictions on free _expression concerning religion, or religious groups, except those expressions that incite to violence.

After three hundred years of religious wars, the western world--through exhaustion if nothing else--came to accept the necessity of a strict division between church and state. And with the ideas of Locke, Rousseau and Burke lighting the way, western liberal pluralism was born. These ideas have not yet even begun to be discussed in the Arab Islamist Middle Rim of this small planet from the borders of Pakistan to the Moroccan Atlantic coast. The reason is simple. These lands adhere to a statist faith. There have been no schisms as the west saw between Catholics and Protestants, and the various sects therein. Religious law, Sha'ria justice, remains embedded in the legal codes of these nations. To them mosque and state are one.

This is the standard to which the radical leaders of Islam adhere. When the President of Iran, the leaders of Al-Qaeda, Iraqi clerics like Moqtada al-Sadr, and the Saudi Wahhabis preach of the restoration of twelve-century Islamic hegemony over the world, they should be taken at their word. The back story to the current wave of "spontaneous demonstrations" shows just how far they are prepared to go in subverting truth and perverting justice. To this philosophy; to these men; to those who follow them; the west owes nothing.

To those who think this issue arose suddenly and recently, think again. It is a case study of what Stalin called "...the big lie readily accepted by the broad masses..."

This "sudden" explosion of protests was started a full five months after the cartoons were first published in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper. Ahmed Abu Laban is the most prominent of a group of Danish imams and activists who toured the Middle East late last year, seeking to "internationalize" their campaign of protest at the cartoons, after deciding their complaints were falling on deaf ears in Denmark.

Mr. Abu Laban, who maintains an office at the Waqfs Mosque in Copenhagen, said that the sudden explosion of anger at the end of last month was due to the rapid success of a "grass-roots" consumer boycott against Danish dairy goods and other exports. Some grass! Some roots!

Mr. Abu Laban, a 60-year-old imam of Palestinian origin, helped organize the hardline "Salafist" television stations based in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, such as al-Majd and Iqra, in fomenting the trade boycott. He also enlisted Moslem clerics. Abu Laban has said "...nobody is denying the role of the mosques. They have loudspeakers, and the people listen." The problem is who they are listening to and what lies they are being told.

One Danish Muslim delegation was sent to Cairo to meet the secretary general of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, and the grand mufti of Egypt, and to al-Azhar University, where it met the grand imam, Sheikh Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi. Mr. Abu Laban then lead a delegation to Qatar, to meet the influential cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, whose fatwas, or religious rulings, are considered binding by many Muslims.

It is time that all the Islamist apologists in the west understood that the European Moslem protests are not so much home-grown as instigated, manipulated and directed by a Mid-East cabal of religious fanatics.

Apparently Mr. Abu Laban's hypocrisy knows no bounds. After he condemned the demonstrations and boycott of Danish goods on Danish television, he turned right around and told the al-Jazeera channel that he was "happy" about it.

As Islamist protests grew, Mr. Abu Laban and his henchmen had another thing to be "happy" about. A small Muslim immigrant organization published a drawing on its Web site of Hitler in bed with Anne Frank. "Write this one in your diary, Anne," Hitler was shown as saying. The group, the Arab European League, said it was exercising its right of "...artistic _expression..." In contrast to Moslem reaction, Jews in Europe aren't marching and torching.

One of the most tragic effects of all this has been on the Moslem community of Europe itself. Tabish Khair, professor of English at the University of Aarhus in Denmark has said that, "The moderate Muslim has again been effectively silenced."

He points to the case in 2005 of a Moroccan-Dutch painter, Rachid Ben Ali, who went into hiding after receiving death threats related to an exhibit showing "hate imams" spitting bombs. And, most infamously, the case in 2004, of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who was murdered for committing what his confessed killer called blasphemy in his film, "Submission," about violence against Islamic women.

Even in the land of Churchill the corrosive effects of this street terror has many analysts concerned that the government of Prime Minister Tony Blair is ready to promote self-censorship when dealing with Islamic militancy in the interest of averting further terrorist attacks. "Islam is protected by an invisible blasphemy law," said Jasper Gerard, a columnist in The Sunday Times. "It is called fear." It is also called appeasement. And as Churchill once said, "An appeaser is someone who feeds the crocodile hoping he will eat him last."

The Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad editorialized that, "In America, few people fear that they will have to live according to the norms of Islam. In European countries, with a large or growing Moslem minority, there is a real fear that behind the demand for respect, hides another agenda: the threat that everyone must adjust to the rules of Islam. The possibility exists that the Moslem immigration is setting off a new generation of European religious wars."

Flemming Rose, the culture editor of Jyllands-Posten, which first published the cartoons, insisted last week that his interest lay solely in asserting the right to free speech over religious taboos. "When Moslems say you are not showing respect, I would say: you are not asking for my respect, you are asking for my submission," he said.

But the east is wrong. There will never be submission. For the west's answer was handed down to us as a legacy by Winston Churchill himself. "Victory at all costs. Victory through all pain. Victory despite all terror."

Beryl P. Wajsman is the president of the Institute for Public Affairs of Montreal.

Since the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, the evil ideology that is Islam has filled many aspects of our lives. There is no getting away from Islam. It has invaded our freedom because of increased security measures, which have become a necessary evil. It is costing us money, because of these same measures, and because of the marketing war being waged against us by our own governments, to try to maintain the myth of the Religion of Peace. The wars we wage abroad (in the hope that we don't have to wage them on our own soil in ten years from now) also cost us money.

We are infidels, who need to have their heads sawed off.

In its current intensity this has been going on for nearly three years now, and fatigue is clearly setting in. And herein lies the danger. This fatigue can have two possible effects. One is that we just stop caring altogether what it is this time that sets off the Muslim rage. It never mattered to begin with, but it certainly doesn't matter any longer.
It would be good if this happened, because it would allow the West to pick up where it left off, and live life the Western way, unencumbered by 7th century barbaric taboos. We would regard the Muslim hordes and their irregular but frequent outbursts of rage as mere temper tantrums, to be ignored or at worst punished by a smack on the behind. And we would not change our ways one bit because of these tantrums.

But this is not how we respond. What we (or our leaders, which amounts to the same thing) do is placate, appease, cave in. We treat every religious complaint they have as if it were something we should in fact pay attention to. We implicitly agree with Muslims worldwide that they are in fact eternal victims, we are their trespassers and tormentors, we do wrong and they are the injured party.

It may be distasteful to urinate on a book, but it is not illegal. And if that book happens to be the koran, that doesn't (or SHOULDN'T) change anything - FOR US.
It is simply not our concern that to a culture or an ideology that isn't ours, it isn't acceptable to create images of man, especially if that man happens to be very important to that culture. We don't care if you draw Mohammed with a dress on and a bomb in his turban. And if you do, than that is your problem, not ours.
It isn't torture to be photographed without clothes on. Just because you believe in Allah doesn't make it so.

And if you feel aggrieved by all these immoral offensive acts, and feel the need to force us to accept your standards as our own, you are in fact aiming to either convert us, or make us subject to your 7th century religious laws. There's a word for that.

Dhimmi.

When the standards and habits of our society are under constant attack by another culture, and we are told - against our own better judgment - that it is we who are in the wrong, that is we who should adjust, accomodate, change, and while at the same time the attacking culture shows us what happens if don't do what our own leaders tell us to do (namely, get sued, persecuted, threatened, attacked and/or killed), then it will seem like there is now way out. We are not really at war, at least not in the conventional sense, so it seems there's no enemy to fight. At the same time it is clear we are no longer free to move and act the way we were used to.

We have in a way become hostages. And we have already begun to show classic hostage behaviour.

The Stockholm syndrome. It means that hostages begin to identify with or feel sympathy for their captors. They will try to establish a bond, so hopefully their captors won't hurt or kill them.

It is not a conscious act. It seems it is instinctive in a situation where a person feels powerless and at the mercy of another, and has reason to fear for his life.

This is exactly what is happening in Western Europe these days. Against all common sense, nearly half of all Germans interviewed stated that respect for Muslim religious beliefs should outweigh freedom of speech, freedom of the press. This of course is not a rational position. It is the psychological response to years and years of indoctrination by our media and governments, combined with exposure to Muslim outrage (both domestic and global) to just about anything. And we just don't want to offend anymore, so we'll just shut up. And we'll conform.

So. We can convert. And become barbarians ourselves. "If you can't beat them, join them."
Or we can becomme dhimmi's. Become second-rate citizens in our own lands.

Or maybe, just maybe, if we elect REAL leaders, and if we throw out the barbarians (and teach them one way or another not to mess with our liberties), we can remain free. And in a few centuries, the barbarians might join us.

Crossposted from GoIsraelGo.blogspot.com

We need to learn a new word: dhimmitude. I've written about dhimmitude periodically, lo, these many years since September 11, but it takes time to sink in. Dhimmitude is the coinage of a brilliant historian, Bat Ye'or, whose pioneering studies of the dhimmi, populations of Jews and Christians vanquished by Islamic jihad, have led her to conclude that a common culture has existed through the centuries among the varied dhimmi populations. From Egypt and Palestine to Iraq and Syria, from Morocco and Algeria to Spain, Sicily and Greece, from Armenia and the Balkans to the Caucasus: Wherever Islam conquered, surrendering dhimmi, known to Muslims as "people of the book [the Bible]," were tolerated, allowed to practice their religion, but at a dehumanizing cost.

This is the lesson of Cartoon Rage 2006, a cultural nuke set off by an Islamic chain reaction to those 12 cartoons of Muhammad appearing in a Danish newspaper. We have watched the Muslim meltdown with shocked attention, but there is little recognition that its poisonous fallout is fear. Fear in the State Department, which, like Islam, called the cartoons unacceptable. Fear in Whitehall, which did the same. Fear in the Vatican, which did the same. And fear in the media, which have failed, with few, few exceptions, to reprint or show the images. With only a small roll of brave journals, mainly in Europe, to salute, we have seen the proud Western tradition of a free press bow its head and submit to an Islamic law against depictions of Muhammad. That's dhimmitude.

Not that we admit it: We dress up our capitulation in fancy talk of "tolerance," "responsibility" and "sensitivity." We even congratulate ourselves for having the "editorial judgment" to make "pluralism" possible. "Readers were well served... without publishing the cartoons," said a Wall Street Journal spokesman. "CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons in respect for Islam," reported the cable network. On behalf of the BBC, which did show some of the cartoons on the air, a news editor subsequently apologized, adding: "We've taken a decision not to go further... in order not to gratuitously offend the significant number" of Muslim viewers worldwide. Left unmentioned is the understanding (editorial judgement?) that "gratuitous offense" leads to gratuitous violence. Hence, fear — not the inspiration of tolerance but of capitulation — and a condition of dhimmitude.

How far does it go? Worth noting, for example, is that on the BBC Web site, a religion page about Islam presents the angels and revelations of Islamic belief as historical fact, rather than spiritual conjecture (as is the case with its Christianity Web page); plus, it follows every mention of Mohammed with "(pbuh)," which means "peace be upon him"—"as if," writes Will Wyatt, former BBC chief executive, in a letter to the Times of London, "the corporation itself were Muslim."

Is it? Are we? These questions may not seem so outlandish if we assess the extent to which encroaching sharia has already changed the Western way. Calling these cartoons "unacceptable," and censoring ourselves "in respect" to Islam brings the West into compliance with a central statute of sharia. As Jyllands-Posten's Flemming Rose has noted, that's not respect, that's submission. And if that's not dhimmitude, what is?

The publication of the Muhammad cartoons solicited by Denmark's Jyllands-Posten was an act of anti-dhimmitude. Since no Danish artist would dare illustrate a PC children's book about Muhammad for fear of Islamic law (and Islamic violence), the newspaper boldly set out to reassert the rule of (non-Islamic) Danish law. It's as simple as that. And as vital. The cartoons ran to establish — or re-establish — Denmark as bastion of Western-style liberty. But in trying to set up a force field against encroaching sharia, Jyllands-Posten and the Danes have showed us that no single bastion of Western liberty can stand alone.

So, how do you say solidarity in Danish? If we don't find out now, our future is more dhimmitude.

Among the men freed without prior notice are 26 Islamic Jihad members from northern and central Samaria, who plotted and masterminded suicide bombings in Hadera, Netanya, and Kfar Saba in 2005.

Also released were 13 members of the PA General Intelligence Service, loyal to Col. Tewfik Tirawri, and 17 members of the PA Military Police – all of whom participated in terrorist attacks.

Abu Mazen thus renews Yasser Arafat's revolving-door policy for terrorists, while Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni call Hamas a terrorist organization and speak about the need to call Hamas a terrorist organization and fight

A 1MN gap between projection and reality.

A 67% clear Jewish majority west of the Jordan River has been solidified since the "disengagement" from Gaza. Contrary to estimates by Israel's demographic establishment, the Jewish majority has been secured for the long run, in light of decreasing Arab population growth in Judea & Samaria (1.8%), increasing population growth of Israel's Jews (2.1%), large scale Arab emigration (mostly from Judea & Samaria) since 1950, and sustained annual Aliya since 1882.

The recent Hamas electoral victory has already accelerated Arab emigration (especially by Palestinian Authority personnel), and the exacerbation of Anti-Semitism in France and in the former USSR has boosted Aliya (Jewish positive migration).

In order to reach its projection, the PCBS made a series of ambitious assumptions. For instance, it assumed an astounding population growth of 170% in 14 years (1990-2004) from 1.5MN Palestinians in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (as documented by Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics - ICBS) to 3.8MN. But, it was not questioned by Israel's demographic establishment, which has embraced the PCBS projection without scrutiny.

What is the source of the 1MN gap?

A US-Israel research, presented at the January 2006 "Herzliya Conference" by Bennett Zimmerman from Los Angeles, proves that the 1997 PCBS projection for Judea, Samaria and Gaza has been refuted annually by the facts on the ground. For instance:

*325,000 Palestinians, who reside overseas, have been included in the 1997 projection, as stated by the Head of the PCBS on Feb. 26, 1998. Such a practice, of including non-de-facto residents in the census, would resemble Israel counting the 800,000 Israelis, who reside in the US.

*210,000 Jerusalem Arabs have been double counted – as West Bankers by the PCBS and as Israelis by Israel.

*310,000 babies – included in the 1997 projection - have never been born, when examining the projection against the number of actual births, as documented by the Palestinian Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education from the village (mid-wife) level to the clinic and hospital level.

*310,000 more must be deducted from the 1997 projection due to erroneous migration projection – 236,000 NET POSITIVE migration which has not occurred - and 74,000 NET NEGATIVE MIGRATION which took place (over 10,000 net negative migration annually since 1997).

*105,000 Palestinians received Israeli ID cards since 1997, and have been double counted – as Palestinians by the PCBS and as Israelis by the ICBS.

The Palestinian Election Commission (PEC) reports 760,000 eligible voters (18 year old and older) in Judea & Samaria. Such a number would be compatible with a total population estimate of 1.4MN (and not 2.4MN projected by the PCBS). In other word, the Palestinian Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education and the PEC have documented 70% inflation in the PCBS projection for Judea & Samaria, which has been adopted by Israel's demographic establishment.

Where have the 1MN disappeared?

Dr. Nicolas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute, who participated in the "Herzliya Conference", praised the US-Israel research: "…The conclusions of this report are not only plausible but quite persuasive... I want to salute Bennett Zimmerman and his Team for their path-breaking study…they caught the demographic professionals asleep at the switch…"

Indeed, Israel's demographic establishment has tended to ignore the substantial decline of birth rate – since 1990 - in Third World, Muslim (e.g. 1.98 children per woman in Iran) and Arab (e.g. 2.9 children in Egypt) countries. It has overlooked reports by the Palestinian Health Ministry, which attest to the gradual decrease of birth rate: Intensified family planning (e.g. 52% of married women using contraceptives), expanded education system, increase of median wedding age, upsurge of divorce rate, stronger career mentality among women, and a dramatic transformation from a poor rural to a poor urban society.

Since 1948, Israel's demographic establishment has underestimated Jewish birth rate, has overestimated Arab birth rate, and has downplayed the importance of Jewish Aliya and negative Arab migration. For instance, Jewish fertility during the last 5 years (2.7 children per woman) has exceeded the highest scenario in the 2000 projection made by ICBS, while Israel's Arab fertility (4 children) is approaching the lowest scenario.

During the 1980s, Prof. Sergio Della Pergolla underestimated the total number of Soviet Jewry by 50%, and claimed that there was no prospect for a substantial Jewish Aliya from the USSR. 1MN came to Israel! Currently, Prof. Della Pergolla is using the PCBS (without Jerusalem Arabs) as the basis for his estimates, as evidenced by his essay, published by the "American Jewish Yearbook 2003". It would have been, mathematically, impossible for him to use the ICBS (2.1MN in Judea and Samaria in 1997) as a basis for his estimates (3.4MN in 2004).

Prof. Arnon Sofer estimated a 2.8MN Arab population in Judea, Samaria and Gaza during an April 2004 lecture at Israel's military academies. In October 2004 he published a booklet claiming a 3.8MN population there. However, in a booklet published in November 2004 he brought the total down to 2.8MN, in a May 2006 debate at the Haifa University he amplified 3.4MN and 3MN, and in a January 24, 2006 Ynet OpEd he rebounded to 3.7MN Palestinians in Judea & Samaria.

Conclusions

There is no demographic sword over the throat of Israel's Jews. In 1900 Jews constituted an 8% minority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, in 1948 they were a 48% minority and by 2005 they have achieved the critical mass of a durable 60% majority, including Gaza, and a 67% majority without Gaza. The only element which could upset the current demographic balance would be a net positive Arab migration to Judea & Samaria, which would then trickle into the "Green Line".

Critical national security decisions must be based on facts and not on grossly erroneous projections made by the PCBS, and not on demographic assumptions/estimates which are divorced from reality.

Yoram Ettinger is the head of the Israeli research team.