Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Most Afghan women forced to marry

Womankind Worldwide, a human rights group, stated that the majority of Afghan women are the victims of forced marriage. Furthermore, the majority of women in Afghanistan get married before the age of 16. The report released to the BBC also asserted that little to no change has occurred in Afghanistan for women since the Taliban was removed from power. BBC, No 'real change' for Afghan women:
An international women's rights group says guarantees given to Afghan women after the fall of the Taleban in 2001 have not translated into real change.

Womankind Worldwide says millions of Afghan women and girls continue to face systematic discrimination and violence in their households and communities.

Womankind Worldwide sent a film crew to Afghanistan to investigate the situation of women there.

They found a young Afghan woman crying in hospital who said she wanted to die. She was recovering after setting fire to herself.

Womankind Worldwide says there has been a dramatic rise in cases of self-immolation by Afghan women since 2003.

It believes many are the result of forced marriages, thought to account for about 60% to 80% of all Afghan marriages.

57% of girls are married before the legal marriage age of 16.

Domestic violence remains widespread.

At an Afghan women's shelter, a young woman told the film crew that she came to the shelter to forget life's troubles.

"I come here so I can ease the pain a little. When I am at home sometimes I feel as though someone is choking me," she told the film crew.

Womankind Worldwide says the Afghan authorities rarely investigate women's complaints of violent attacks.

Women reporting rape run the risk of being imprisoned for having sexual intercourse outside marriage.
You can be certain that out of the women who are forced to marry, each one is promptly taken home and raped by their new husband. The problem is not just the Taliban, the problem is Islam. That's why even with the Taliban out of power and with 'moderate' Muslims in control, 'moderate' Muslims supported by the Bush administration, the plight of women in Afghanistan has not changed.

Muslims kill 11 at wedding, children badly burned

In the Muslim world the battle rages on not just against the 'Great Satan' but against other Muslims. No place is too sacred or holy for an Islamic suicide attack. Not even a wedding. MSNBC, Wedding party blast in Baghdad kills 11:
BAGHDAD, Iraq - A suicide car bomber struck a wedding party in Baghdad on Tuesday, killing 11 people and wounding 21 outside the bride’s home, police said.

The bomber drove an explosives-rigged sedan into a crowd of Shiite celebrants in the northeastern Shaab neighborhood, police Lt. Ahmed Mohamed said.

Weddings and funerals are in Iraq are relatively easy targets for suicide bombers hoping to spark sectarian reprisals and push Iraq into a full-blown civil war.

Five children were among those hospitalized, said Dr. Qasim al-Suweadi of the nearby al-Sadr hospital.

Many of the wounded children were burned over much of their bodies. AP Television News video from the hospital showed victims in obvious pain.

One girl, who appeared to be no older than 4, had most of the hair burned from her head, tiny pierced earrings still in place in her badly burned ear. Most of her body was burned as well.

Monday, October 30, 2006

Yes, he really has Parkinson's

Reprinted from FOX News. Brackets mine.

Michael J. Fox's Appearance in TV Ad Typical of Parkinson's

Wednesday, October 25, 2006
By Michael W. Smith

When actor Michael J. Fox appeared in a TV political ad supporting stem cell research, a flurry of controversy erupted around his Parkinson’s disease symptoms.

Was he exaggerating, as one radio commentator suggested? [FOX News decided not to print the name of this radio commentator, but The Otter will. It was Rush Limbaugh - fat, addicted to drugs, and a college dropout. Rush routinely makes pleasure trips to the Dominican Republic where the child sex trade flourishes and prescrption drugs are sold like candy.]

Many people don’t realize how severe Parkinson’s disease can be. This is largely because most of us have never witnessed these symptoms unless we personally know someone struggling with this disabling condition.

Fox has a very severe form of Parkinson’s that affected him at a young age. And he’s been through many aggressive treatments, including brain surgery.

The symptoms he displayed on the commercial are common Parkinson’s disease symptoms.

In the past we’ve witnessed his tremor that’s so characteristic of Parkinson’s. And his uncontrolled body movements that appeared during the commercial are also typical of Parkinson’s -- and also possibly a side effect of one of his medications.

Despite all his treatment, Fox continues to have severe Parkinson’s symptoms that are likely getting worse over time.

Unfortunately, medications often may not work that well, especially as the disease progresses. That’s why researchers are working furiously to find new and improved treatments for Parkinson’s.

More information on Parkinson’s disease symptoms and treatment can be found in WebMD’s Guide to Parkinson’s disease.

By Michael W. Smith, MD, reviewed by Louise Chang, MD.

SOURCE: WebMD Medical Reference in collaboration with The Cleveland Clinic: "Parkinson's Disease." Wire reports.

Hilali hospitalized

'Rape Sheikh' Taj Aldin al-Hilali suddenly fell ill on Monday with chest pains and was hospitalized. BBC, Sydney Muslim cleric seeks leave:
On Monday, at a meeting with the Lebanese Muslim Association, he collapsed and was rushed to hospital.

He was said to be in a stable condition but would remain in hospital for at least three days.

Outside the hospital, Lebanese Muslim Association Tom Zreika released a statement from the sheikh, which said he had "asked for indefinite leave from my duties at Lakemba Mosque".
Related: Muslim leader blames rape on women, Rape endorsing cleric barred

Israel Beitenu joins coalition

Despite protest from left-wingers and Arab MKs, Israel Beitenu was approved to join Olmert's coalition government and Avigdor Lieberman was appointed Minister for Strategic Affairs. YNet, Gov't approves Lieberman's entry:
During a three-minute session on Monday, the government approved the appointment of Israel Our Home leader Avigdor Lieberman as Minister for Strategic Affairs, signaling the inclusion of the hawkish party in the coalition.

Condi makes Israel less secure

Pressure on Israel by Condoleezza Rice to allow Palestinians with US citizenship to remain illegally in Gaza and the West Bank may be making Israel less secure. By now most Americans who aren't complete idiots know about homegrown terrorists, the fifth column made up of radical Muslims bred in mosques right on our home soil. Frequently these are US-born Arabs who are raised in Arab communities with close ties to the Middle East. As a result they travel to and from places such as Palestine, exporting and importing terrorist resources.

Despite the existential threat to both Israel and the United States, Condoleezza Rice objected to Israel's legal right to deport illegal aliens living in the West Bank and Gaza. Washington Times, U.S. hits Israeli expulsion policy:
RAMALLAH, West Bank -- Israel may be forced to reverse a policy of expelling Palestinians with U.S. citizenship from the West Bank and Gaza Strip after a vigorous protest from the United States.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has objected to the policy, which could drive tens of thousands of foreign passport holders from their homes in the Palestinian territories.

The territories are home to about 35,000 U.S. citizens of Palestinian descent, many of whom returned during the mid-1990s after the Oslo peace accord, and have since married and started families.

They have been unable to become permanent residents because Israel, which controls access to the territories, has refused to grant them residency. Although most have made do with tourist visas, Israel recently stopped issuing them, forcing Palestinians with foreign passports to leave immediately or stay illegally at risk of expulsion.

BBC waters down terror report

On Monday, Pakistani gunships attacked a religious school in Afghanistan that was being used as a training camp for al-Qaeda. At least 80 terrorists were killed according to reports. It was quite an accomplishment by the Pakistani government.

Headlines in the mainstream media read like this:

'Al-Qaeda school' attack: 80 dead, CNN

Pakistan hits al-Qaeda-linked school, MSNBC

CNN and MSNBC are liberal news stations. We're not talking FOX or FrontPage here. Yet the BBC has swung so far left that it refuses to mention the school's link to al-Qaeda:

Pakistan madrassa raid 'kills 80', BBC News

Because this headline omits any discussion of al-Qaeda links it conveys the message that the madrassa was an ordinary Islamic school. Unlike with the other titles, you can't infer from the BBC that the 80 dead were al-Qaeda terrorists. It gives the impression that 80 innocent students were killed in a madrassa in Pakistan, rather than the truth - 80 terrorists were killed in an al-Qaeda training camp by Pakistani forces.

On dinosaurs, vampires, ghosts, and rubber balls

In a move sure to anger young-Earth creationists and fundamentalist Christians alike, FOX News reported that mass extinctions, such as the disappearance of the dinosaurs, may be the result of multiple factors rather than one grand event (such as a meteor). FOX News did not comment on the possibility that Old Scratch put dinosaur fossils in the ground to trick Bible-believing Christians. This caused many of America's faithful to tear their clothes, don sackcloth, and cover themselves in ashes.

Likely to further incite Biblical literalists; FOX News reported that there is no scientific basis for ghosts and vampires. Between hinting at evilution and denying the reality of ghosts and demons despite their Biblical basis (1 Samuel 28:7-19, Matthew 8:16), FOX has become the true heretic's news source.

ABC News reported that a 100 million-year-old bee was found stuck in amber. Godless, demon-worshipping scientists say it's the oldest bee ever found. Bible-thumping, Jesus-jacking Christians know the Earth is no older than 6000 years, of course.

On a more serious note, a Delaware man made a 3,300-pound rubber ball.

Sunday, October 29, 2006

Muslim-American immigrant on trial for genital cutting

The practice of female genital mutilation, termed "female circumcision" by some, is common in the Muslim world.

There are multiple types of female genital mutilation; they differ between Muslim communities, ranging from complete removal of the clitoris to near-complete destruction of the genital area. In Islam the goal of female genital mutilation is to prevent a woman from ever receiving sexual pleasure or being aroused. Female genital mutilation is regarded as a human rights violation by most human rights groups and is illegal in most Western countries.

This is why Khalid Adem, an Islamic immigrant to the United States from Ethiopia, faces up to 40 years in prison for cutting off his 2 year old daughter's clitoris with a pair of scissors. ABC News, Genital Cutting on Trial in Georgia Case:

The trial of an Atlanta-area father accused of circumcising his 2-year-old daughter with scissors is focusing attention on an ancient African practice that experts say is slowly becoming more common in the U.S. as immigrant communities grow.

Khalid Adem, a 31-year-old immigrant from Ethiopia, is charged with aggravated battery and cruelty to children. Human rights observers said they believe this is the first criminal case in the U.S. involving the 5,000-year-old practice.

Prosecutors say Adem used scissors to remove his daughter's clitoris in their apartment in 2001. The child's mother said she did not discover it until more than a year later.

"He said he wanted to preserve her virginity," Fortunate Adem, the girl's mother, testified this week. "He said it was the will of God. I became angry in my mind. I thought he was crazy."

The girl, now 7, also testified, clutching a teddy bear and saying that Adem "cut me on my private part." Adem cried loudly as his daughter left the courtroom.

Muslims sell slaves in Islamic schools

They are called daaras or madrasahs, Islamic schools that emphasize studying the Qur'an. Madrasahs are notorious for indoctrinating youths with jihadi dogma, anti-American propaganda, and conspiracy theories. Even more shocking are their dual purposes; they serve as fronts for the Islamic practice of child slavery. MSNBC, UN: Koranic schools fuel Africa child trafficking:
Holding a rusty begging tin that is the trademark of the “talibes” — students at Senegal’s Koranic schools — Balde says he must take back money or face a beating from his religious teacher, or marabout.

“I must bring back 500 francs, about $0.90, every day to my master or face punishment,” says the tiny boy, who travels from his squalid daara, or religious school, in the distant suburb of Thiaroye to beg all day in the city center.

Balde is one of an estimated 100,000 children begging on the streets of Senegal — about 1 percent of the population, according to U.N. officials — most of them sent out by their religious teachers...

...Now, the booming industry has become so successful that children are smuggled from neighboring Mali, Gambia or Mauritania to beg in Dakar, U.N. child agency UNICEF said. Balde was separated from his parents in Guinea Bissau.

The child slave trade isn't limited to begging, although in Senegal forcing children to beg on the streets has become a mafia-style racket that brings in hefty profits for Islamic leaders. Children are sold into other types of slavery as well. They go to labor camps, mines, lumber mills, and docks. Many are sold into sex slavery. NY Times, Africa’s World of Forced Labor, in a 6-Year-Old’s Eyes:

Mark Kwadwo is 6 years old. About 30 pounds, dressed in a pair of blue and red underpants and a Little Mermaid T-shirt, he looks more like an oversized toddler than a boat hand. He is too little to understand why he has wound up in this fishing village, a two-day trek from his home.

But the three older boys who work with him know why. Like Mark, they are indentured servants, leased by their parents to Mr. Takyi for as little as $20 a year.

Until their servitude ends in three or four years, they are as trapped as the fish in their nets, forced to work up to 14 hours a day, seven days a week, in a trade that even adult fishermen here call punishing and, at times, dangerous.

Mr. Takyi’s boys — conscripts in a miniature labor camp, deprived of schooling, basic necessities and freedom — are part of a vast traffic in children that supports West and Central African fisheries, quarries, cocoa and rice plantations and street markets. The girls are domestic servants, bread bakers, prostitutes. The boys are field workers, cart pushers, scavengers in abandoned gem and gold mines...

...The International Labor Organization, a United Nations agency, estimates that 1.2 million are sold into servitude every year in an illicit trade that generates as much as $10 billion annually.

Africa’s children, the world’s poorest, account for roughly one-sixth of the trade, according to the labor organization. Data is notoriously scarce, but it suggests victimization of African children on a huge scale.

Related: Dubai Muslims Enslave Children

Civilian casualties in Lebanon

Why were there so many civilian casualties on the Lebanese side during the Second Lebanon War? The knee-jerk response is to blame Israel. However, according to the Geneva Conventions it is unlawful for militants to hide behind civilians and in civilian areas to prevent attacks. When civilians are killed because they are being used as human shields the legal burden falls upon those using them as human shields. In the case of the Second Lebanon War that would be Hezbollah. Hezbollah is solely to blame for civilian casualties because Hezbollah used human shields and hid in civilian areas.

Hezbollah's use of human shields was not reflexive. Hezbollah had planned to use civilian areas to shield terrorist positions long before the war started. The Washington Times, Deadly Hezbollah chess match:
The activity upon which Hezbollah had embarked was conversion of private homes into mini-military sites from where it could easily target Israel's civilian population. Cloaking itself as the protective shepherd, Hezbollah effectively prepared an unwitting Lebanese civilian flock as sacrificial lambs to be slaughtered in furtherance of its own war-fighting capabilities.

Long before hostilities erupted on July 12, Hezbollah construction teams had gone out and modified numerous Lebanese homes. Sometimes with, but most the time without, the homeowner's permission, workers began adding on a large, single-function room. These rooms were unique for, when completed, they lacked an essential element of all rooms -- a door. Each room was sealed shut -- but only, and immediately, after an object was placed inside.

Often homeowners and neighbors did not know what exactly was entombed within the room as the object's insertion and the subsequent sealing of the room normally took place at night -- with the object always kept under wraps.

The residences Hezbollah selected for these unsolicited "home improvements" were chosen for their proximity to the Israeli border. When the fighting started after Tel Aviv responded militarily to Hezbollah's July cross-border raid, resulting in the deaths of three Israeli soldiers and the capture of two more, the purpose of the covert home improvements became evident to the owners -- though many were destroyed by Israeli air strikes before they could be activated.

When war erupted in southern Lebanon, designated leaders of Hezbollah combat teams received envelopes, each containing an address of one of the modified homes. The team quickly deployed to its assigned location, immediately breaking through an exterior wall of the sealed room. Each envelope contained aiming and firing instructions for the object prepositioned inside the room before it was sealed -- a surface-to-surface missile atop a launcher. After removing part of the room's roof to allow for unobstructed flight and on command, the team was to fire the missile, raining death and destruction down upon Israel's civilian population.

There was one major flaw in Hezbollah's home-conversion-to-missile-launch-site plan: Their construction activities had not gone unnoticed by Israeli intelligence. Closely monitoring Hezbollah's activities, they knew in advance the locations of most sites. As each room was completed, it had been added to Israel's target list so, once fighting started, it could quickly be destroyed -- its civilian hosts in many cases becoming collateral damage due to Hezbollah's illegal use of such a tactic.

Israel received much negative press for failing to accurately assess the Hezbollah threat. Clearly, some failures did occur, such as assessing how deeply Hezbollah had entrenched itself into southern Lebanon and Hezbollah's ability, undoubtedly with Iranian assistance, to monitor Israeli battlefield communications.

But Israel must be applauded for its success in identifying ahead of time the threat posed by Hezbollah's tactical use of private homes for military purposes -- a threat Israeli air power was then able to effectively negate. Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Dan Gillerman alluded two days into the conflict to these illegal Hezbollah tactics, a reference apparently lost on the media that failed to investigate further.

Hezbollah had designed a tactical plan calculated to maximize civilian casualties on both sides of battlefield -- by design on the Israeli side in targeting its major population centers and by consequence on the Lebanese side as Israel responded. While this tactic was, from the Israeli perspective, checkmated by virtue of good intelligence, from the Lebanese perspective, many civilians at these launch sites were forced to pay the ultimate price. Sadly, from Hezbollah's perspective, these civilian casualties were but dispensable pawns in its chess match with Israel.
(Hat tip: LGF)

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Maimonides and stem cell research

Reprinted from YNet, Maimonides and stem cell research.

[This is an important article for Christian fundamentalists, specifically the Christians who reject scientific fact in lieu of Biblical literalism and who reject scientific research on the basis of religious dogma. The same ones who want to impose religious legislation on our free Western society and set up a Christian theocracy. These are the Christians who are more similar to Muslim extremists than to Jews. You know who you are.]

Maimonides and stem cell research

According to Judaism, human knowledge should not be hindered or ignored

Prof. Moshe Kaveh
Published: 10.28.06, 16:28

The mid-term elections set to be held in the US in two weeks will involve science, but not anything that would warrant our envy. Among other things, members of the House and a third of the Senate will be scrutinized on their stance towards a field of innovative biological medical research – human stem cell research.

Such a situation is hard to imagine in Jewish law due to a distinct trait in Jewish orthodox thought.

About three months ago, President George W. Bush used his right of veto for the first time and his party is likely to pay the cost at the upcoming elections. He nullified the Senate's resolution to expand the abovementioned research and its public funding, and he did so by employing religious arguments. He, as a Christian believer, felt obliged to limit intellectual curiosity pertaining to human life.

Under the Bush administration and its commendable separation between state and religion, researchers are banned from conducting stem cell experimentation in public laboratories. Even the vast medical potential of stem cell biology is not currently available to the American academia in this current conflict.

Meanwhile here in Israel, a state that has yet to separate state from religion, there is no legal restriction regarding stem cell research for reasons pertaining to religion. This derives from Judaism's liberal attitude in its definition of the beginning of embryonic life (which enables abortions at the early stages of pregnancy, contrary to Christianity).

There is also no legal restriction stemming from religion imposed on any other research in the fields of natural science.

Jewish law on this matter leans on the rulings of our greatest rabbinical arbiters regarding religion and medicine aimed at saving human life. On dealing with the general topic of religion and science, the concept begins with Maimonides, who wrote more than 900 years ago: God's divine science will not be achieved without natural science.

In other words, contrary to what is often attributed to traditional Jewish thought, according to a pious Jew there is no contradiction between religion and science. "Only after achieving natural science," namely, only when relying on the truths embodied in the laws of natural science, can a Jew come closer to his God.

The understanding of this information and its rules is perceived in Judaism as "God's will", to which we are all obligated to adhere.

Subsequently, there is no contradiction in a law-abiding Jew - a believer in the laws introduced by Maimonides - being a scientist involved in a modern scientific discipline.

Faith is in the creator of the universe "who has no body and no bodily image" as in the words of the prayer, and therefore he cannot be described and has no form. Scientists explore the secrets of nature with the gifts bestowed on them so as not to deny the presence of logical facts.

A Jew who makes the connection between Judaism and science must not be a Karaite who interprets the Torah in a limited literal way. We must pursue the tradition of our great scholars who didn't call for "an eye for an eye."

Reconciling Judaism and Big Bang

I have found enough explanations in the pages of the Talmud to demonstrate that each of the six days of the creation were not limited to 24 hours.

Subsequently, there is no difficulty accepting the findings that tie the familiar beginnings of the "big bang" creation, set at roughly 15 billion years of age, to Earth at 4.5 billion years of age. Religious scientists are not sinning when they don't ignore evolutionary evidence – the gradual development of life throughout at least 2.5.billion years.

Scientific law in the eyes of the Jewish spirit is the will of God. Any contradiction between this and Jewish faith is fictitious, resulting from lack of human knowledge which is destined to be filled.

According to Judaism, such knowledge must be fully exploited; human knowledge should not be hindered and we should not ignore it by extolling ignorance.

Rape-endorsing cleric barred

Sheik Taj Aldin al-Hilali, the Mufti of Australia who blamed women for being raped, was given a slap on the wrist by Sydney's mosque association on Friday. BBC, Australia Muslim cleric suspended:
Australia's top Muslim cleric has been barred from preaching for up to three months, after comparing immodestly dressed women to "uncovered meat".

Sheikh Taj el-Din al-Hilali's comments, suggesting that women who did not wear a headscarf attracted sexual assault, have caused a storm of protest.

Sydney's mosque association said the suspension would give the cleric time to consider the impact of his words.

But Australian Premier John Howard said the action was insufficient.
Up to three months means there is a chance he won't be barred for the full time. The Otter agrees with John Howard. Three months is not sufficient punishment for a man like al-Hilali. He incited and excused rape. Needless to say, the mosque association felt pressured to chasten al-Hilali only because the Muslim community had to save face in light of international criticism. The gentle, token punishment demonstrates that Australian Muslims really support al-Hilali and what he said about raping women. The fact that al-Hilali is still the leading Muslim cleric in Australia also indicates the widespread acceptance of his comments by the Australian Muslim community.

Well, let it be known rape isn't the only thing Australian Muslims are supporting. The Australian, Muddle headed Mufti:
Controversy has dogged the university-educated sheik since his days in Egypt, where he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood...

...Hilali arrived in Australia in 1982 and overstayed his tourist visa. He came to the attention of the authorities in 1988 when he gave an anti-Semitic lecture to a group of Muslim students at the Universisity of Sydney. It was titled The Disposition of Jews in the Light of the Koran, and he was quoted as saying: "Judaism controls the world by secret movements (and) destructive doctrines and groups such as communism, libertinism, Freemasonry, Baha'ism, the Rotary clubs, the nationalistic and racist doctrines. The Jews try to control the world through sex, then sexual perversion, then the promotion of espionage, treason, and economic hoarding."

...In 2004 he created another furore with a speech he gave in a mosque in Lebanon. It was claimed he praised the September 11 attacks on the US as "God's work against the oppressors" and supported Arab martyrs and a holy war against Israel...

...A month ago he was dumped from John Howard's Muslim Community Reference Group after denying the Holocaust and calling it a "Zionist lie". He also referred to Israel as a "cancer".
Not only did Sheikh Taj el-Din al-Hilali approve of raping women, he was a member of a terrorist organization, supported the 9/11 attacks, denied the Holocaust, and championed a whole list of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Note that the mosque association in Sydney has never taken action against al-Hilali for any of this. Why? It's never received enough media attention to warrant it.

Al-Hilali is the man who most Australian Muslims look up to. As Natalie O'Brien from The Australian wrote, "He is revered by the Muslim community almost everywhere he goes in Sydney's southwestern suburbs, the nation's Arab heartland." If this is who Muslims support in moderate, Western countries like Australia imagine who they support in the Middle East.

Friday, October 27, 2006

SA newspaper bans Jewish journalists

Paula Slier is a Jewish South African and a journalist. She worked for the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) covering the Middle East until she was fired - for being Jewish. The SABC came out and flatly told her that they took a pro-Palestinian stance and that they did not want any Jews covering the Middle East. YNet, Reporter blacklisted 'for being Jewish':
A Jewish South African reporter has been 'banned' by the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) from providing news coverage from the Middle East, after her managing director said he did not want a "white Jewish girl" covering the region, the reporter told Ynetnews.

"I was a reporter and newsreader, and Snuki Zikalala was head of TV and radio news, so he was my line manager. He was not that great to work with," Paula Slier, the reporter, told Ynetnews.

In 2004, Slier went to Ramallah to cover Arafat's illness. While in the West Bank, Slier said she was informed that the SABC had "received a directive: 'No more reports from Paula.'"

"I tried to find out why they were not using my work anymore, and I was told by a senior manager in SABC, which obviously I can't name, that Zikalala said they don't want a white Jewish girl reporting from Ramallah, though the implication was from the whole of the Middle East," Slier said.

After it emerged that SABC's blacklist included a range of sources, including some critical of the South African government, SABC launched an investigation of itself.

"When the investigation came out, Zikalala told the inquiry: 'From the movement I come from, we support the PLO.' And then he went on to call what was happening in the Middle East a 'Jewish war,' and then he said: We know Paula, we know the position which she holds," Slier said, quoting from the investigation.

Clearly anti-Semitic and biased to say the least. It would be reasonable to expect the Jewish reporter who was discriminated against to be outraged. Yet this isn't the stance she took. In true self-hating, Chomskyesque style, she made excuses for the SABC's anti-Semitic policies:
"The thing is, in South Africa, I've been heavily criticized by the Jewish community for being pro-Palestinian. So he makes the inference that because I'm Jewish, I would automatically support what would be happening in Israel," Slier added...

Slier told Ynetnews she did not feel the directive to blacklist her was anti-Semitic.

"For me personally I do think there is a difference between anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment. Many in the Jewish community in South Africa fear that if many people start spreading anti-Israel sentiment, it will cause deeper anti-Semitism. But that's not the view I have. I often find that people do have the right to criticize Israel," Slier said.

"I don't have any experience of anti-Semitism at the SABC, and I worked there for quite a few years. He (Zikalala) has a particular anti-Israel view. What is worrying is that this guy now, as head of SABC, is taking his own personal view, and imposing it on the SABC," she added.

The same old line - "A difference between anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment."

Paula Slier missed the issue. They didn't fire her for being an Israeli (because she isn't an Israeli). They didn't fire her for being pro-Israeli (because she's pro-Palestinian). They didn't fire her for being Zionist (she's anti-Zionist). They fired her for one reason alone - she was Jewish.

She missed it because she's a brainwashed, self-hating lapdog. Instead of embracing her Jewish heritage and a strong moral compass she pandered to the idiotarians. She rejected Israel and supported terrorists thinking it would win her the acceptance of the press. She was that naive. No matter how much she fought against the Jewish people, her own people, it wouldn't make Zikalala forget she was Jewish. Even after being blatantly discriminated against for being Jewish she still tried to make excuses on behalf of the SABC.

There is a strong message here for all Jews - the left will never accept you. No matter how much you hate Israel you won't be accepted among the Israel-hating left. It's because you're Jewish. It's because, contrary to the claims of the anti-Semites, most criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitism is oft disguised as criticism of Zionism and criticism of Israel. Like Martin Luther King Jr. said in a 1968 Harvard speech (not to be confused with the disputed Letter to an anti-Zionist Friend), "When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews; you are talking anti-Semitism."

Muslim leader blames rape on women

Sheik Taj Aldin al-Hilali, the leading Muslim cleric in Australia, blamed women for 'causing' rape. While shocking to any decent person, blaming the victims of crimes is quite common in the Muslim world. Al-Hilali also issued a half-assed apology after pressure from the political realm. YNET, Muslim cleric apologizes for rape remark:

In a translation from Arabic by the newspaper, later verified by other media, al-Hilali was quoted as saying in the sermon: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside ... and the cats come to eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat’s?"

"The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred," he was quoted as saying, referring to the head scarf worn by some Muslim women.

Does this mean that in the Muslim mindset women are like uncovered meat and Muslim men are like wild, predatory animals looking to tear the meat (women) apart? It seems so. It might explain the extreme violence against women that is so common in the Islamic world.

So, women, beware of wild Muslim cats. Don't be like uncovered meat - lock yourselves in you rooms and cover yourselves with beekeeper suits. Because now you know, according to Islam, if you get raped it's YOUR fault.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Moonbat writes in about BBC bias

In response to The Otter's recent coverage of BBC's self-admitted bias, an Anonymous Roving Moonbat Wacko™ wrote, "Seeing as you're so concerned with fairness, balance and accuracy, I'm sure you'll be posting this link soon." The aforementioned link was an article by Helen Boaden, BBC news director. As I am indeed so concerned with fairness, balance, and accuracy, here is the link - Bias at the BBC?

You might be able to tell from the title it's an attempt to respond to the leak. And for patrons of the Beeb, such as our very own Anonymous Roving Moonbat Wacko™, anything Helen Boaden says is likely to be accepted on blind faith similar to that of a religious zealot. Those of us who are interested in taking a critical look at the article might find it lacking:

The Mail on Sunday based its story on a leak from what it called a “secret” meeting of BBC executives and governors, and claims that it was our former political editor, Andrew Marr himself, who confessed to the liberal bias of the organization. His take was reinforced by Jeff Randall, who until recently was our business editor. “If they say it, then it must be true” was the thrust of the story.

Well I was one of the people who was at the "secret" meeting. and I have to say the reality was somewhat different to the way the press are reporting it.

For a start, this wasn’t a secret meeting... it was streamed live on the web. The meeting was made up of executives, governors and lots of non-BBC people like John Lloyd from the FT and Janet Daley from the Daily Telegraph. It was planned as a serious seminar to investigate and understand better the BBC’s commitment to impartiality in an age in which spin and opinion riddle much of the world’s journalism. The seminar was part of a bigger project kicked off by Michael Grade earlier this year to re-examine the underlying principles of impartiality in the digital age when boundaries between conventional broadcasting and the new platforms will increasingly disappear.

This failed to explain why both Andrew Marr and Jeff Randall admitted a liberal bias in the BBC. It also didn't mention Malcolm Balen's confirmation of the bias. In fact the only attempt to refute the allegations was to claim that Jeff Randall was making "a few good jokes." Boaden concluded by asserting that it was, "their personal opinions."

As if this article wasn't Helen Boaden's personal opinion. Boaden is a tainted source, to say the least, considering she had so much to gain by defending the BBC. Randall, Marr, Balen, and the other senior BBC staff members who asserted a bias had nothing to gain by doing so. Rather, they had lots to lose.

Although for the Anonymous Roving Moonbat Wacko™, the type of person to whom the BBC is a liberal Mecca, Helen Boaden's tainted opinion is worth far more than the combined analysis of other senior BBC members.

Here are some points brought up by the leak and senior BBC members. These are points that were not mentioned in Boaden's response at all:

  • The report stated the BBC was overstaffed with homosexuals and other minorities, giving it a bias toward those groups. It also stated that the BBC...
    • ...was biased against the countryside.
    • ...had anti-Christian and anti-Jewish bias.
    • ...was biased against Israel and covered the second intifada unfairly.
    • ...was anti-American.
    • ...actively promoted multiculturalism.
    • ...leaned toward political correctness rather than accuracy in reporting.

We'll give Boaden some credit on the Muslim issue. She addressed Muslim women wearing headscarves to read the news. She didn't address the fact that she would have allowed a Bible, Catholic icons, or kosher food to be thrown in the trash - but not a Qur'an.

Let's revisit her previous claim, that the meeting wasn't secret.

If it wasn't a secret meeting and was live on the web I'm sure the BBC could just make it public and end this whole fiasco. Right? The Telegraph revealed that the BBC has undertaken a legal battle to prevent the report of the meeting from becoming public. Normally the report would be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act. Instead, the BBC is trying to seal it away so that no one can ever get their hands on it. How can she claim it isn't secret while the BBC tries to keep it secret? Pure hypocrisy and idiocy!

Without addressing any of the issues mentioned above, Helen Boaden concluded with this:

And that’s where the broad audience comes in. What really counts is not what a group of BBC executives and VIPs think, or indeed what a few columnists believe. The important thing is whether or not our audiences think we are biased. And on that the evidence is robust.

Asked recently which of the four main broadcasters they would term "trustworthy", nearly two thirds - 60% - cited the BBC. In contrast, 26% said ITV, 16% mentioned Channel 4, and 14% Sky. (Mori, 2006)

No Helen, what really counts is the truth. Not what the uneducated masses believe.

This is a prime example of an informal logical fallacy, called argumentum ad populum, or the bandwagon fallacy. Even if 100% of the people surveyed believed the BBC was trustworthy it wouldn't make it so. The number of people who like the BBC, or consider it "trustworthy," says nothing about the actual content. Only about the opinions of the ignorant masses. And yes, the masses are ignorant.

What really counts is what a group of BBC executives and VIPs think. They are the only ones with real experience inside the BBC. They're the ones know the business well enough to make an educated analysis of the subject. And they know each other personally, thus being acquainted with deep-seated biases among themselves. The audiences know none of this.

The audiences Boaden spoke of are primarily composed of Anonymous Roving Moonbat Wackos™ who believe everything the Beeb tells them without any critical thought. They are the Idiotarians who think logical fallacies like Boaden's argumentum ad populum are strong evidence.

It breaks down like this: On one hand you can believe the leaked report, Andrew Marr, Jeff Randall, Malcolm Balen, and the other senior BBC staff members who have direct firsthand experience, plus evidence, of BBC bias. On the other hand you can believe the uneducated masses, the audience, the Anonymous Roving Moonbat Wackos™, and the Idiotarians.

BBC Finally Admits Bias

What we've known all along has come to light. The British Broadcasting Corporation is biased. An account of a BBC impartiality summit, leaked to London's Evening Standard newspaper, confirmed that the BBC actively promotes homosexuality and multiculturalism. Furthermore, the leak confirmed an anti-Israeli and anti-American bias in the BBC compounded with an anti-Christian and anti-Jewish bias. However, the BBC does not have a bias against Islam but rather for Islam. The leak's claims have been validated by top-ranking BBC personalities, including senior editor advisor Malcolm Balen.

CBN, a senior Christian news station, wrote:
The report says BBC executives admit the corporation is dominated by homosexuals, is anti-American, and more sensitive towards the feelings of Muslims than Christians. For example, the report says "executives would let the Bible be thrown in to a dustbin on a TV comedy show, but not the Koran."
The Guardian, while trying to cover up for its partner in crime, went into more depth discussing the perfidy of the BBC (highlights mine):
Those who grumble tirelessly that the BBC is dominated by a culture of liberal partiality are enjoying themselves just now. The Corporation is spending lots of our money battling through the courts to prevent the release of a report on its Middle East coverage. Compiled two years ago by a former Nine O'Clock News editor, Malcolm Balen, in the capacity of editorial adviser, it is said to have found that the BBC was unfair to Israel in its coverage of the second intifada.
Now readers might ask, "Hey, I thought you said the Guardian was trying to defend the BBC?" Well, it was. It did it in a true Clintonesque style. In response to the Guardian's own title, "Does the BBC have a liberal bias?" It responds:
It depends what you mean by 'liberal' - and what you mean by 'bias'.
Well, we won't even go there. We all know that the BBC is a filthy rag full of liberal hatred toward Americans, Israelis, Jews, and Christians that consistently panders to Islamic fascism and terrorism. That must be what we mean by the terms 'liberal' and 'bias'. And the leaked report confirms it.

YNet gives us a prime example from the leaked report:
An internal memo, recently discovered by the British media, revealed what the BBC has been trying to hide. Senior figures admitted in a recent 'impartiality' summit that the BBC was guilty of promoting Left-wing views and anti-Christian sentiment.

Most executives admitted that the corporation’s representation of homosexuals and ethnic minorities was unbalanced and disproportionate, and that it leaned too strongly towards political correctness, the overt promotion of multiculturalism, anti-Americanism and discrimination against the countryside.

A truly shocking revelation to come out of the summit was expected to invoke a storm in Britain, which has already reached the boiling point with regards to the treatment of Muslims and the issue of the veil.

For the purpose of illustration, the executives were given a scenario in which Jewish Comedian Sasha Baron Cohen would participate in a program titled ‘Room 101’, a studio program where guests would be asked for their opinions on different issues, and allowed to symbolically throw things they hated in a garbage bin.

The executives were asked what they would do if Cohen decided to throw ‘Kosher food’, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bible, and the Quran in the garbage bin.

The executives said they would allow everything to be thrown in the garbage bin, save the Quran, for fear of offending the British Muslim community.

Some of it is clearly fear-driven. It's okay to throw the Bible and kosher food in the trash. Jews and Christians aren't going to behead anybody.

Right now a debate rages on between the BBC and the legal community to release the entire report under the Freedom of Information Act. Clearly the BBC has something to hide. Yet keeping the report hidden won't do much good. With senior editors like Malcolm Balen affirming the bias it will be very difficult to right its reputation. The Telegraph reports:
The High Court action is the latest stage of a lengthy and expensive battle by Steven Sugar, a lawyer, to get access to the document, which was compiled by Malcolm Balen, a senior editorial adviser, in 2004.

Mr Sugar said: "This is a serious report about a serious issue and has been compiled with public money. I lodged the request because I was concerned that the BBC's reporting of the second intifada was seriously unbalanced against Israel, but I think there are other issues at stake now in the light of the BBC's reaction."
All one has to do is take a look at the headlines circulating in the mainstream media to see what a blow to the BBC's reputation this has been.

CBN, BBC admits bias against Christianity

This Is London, Yes we are biased on religion and politics, admit BBC executives

YNet, BBC admits: We are biased on religion and politics

Arutz Sheva, BBC admits left-wing bias

World Net Daily, BBC confesses bias on religion, politics

YNet, BBC seeks to suppress bias report

Jewish refugees seek rights

Everyone knows about Palestinian refugees. Liberals and anti-Semites blame the refugee problem on Israel. History accounts the problem to Jordan and Egypt, countries that attacked Israel and annexed the land set aside for a Palestinian state.

What is sadly overlooked is the fact that there were Jewish refugees as well. Not just from Palestine, but from the entire Middle East. As many as one million of them were expelled or forced to flee Arab countries between 1940 and 1950. Today liberals, Muslims, anti-Semites, and the mainstream media cry about the plight of Palestinian refugees while ignoring Jewish refugees. They also forget one fact - most Palestinian refugees are held in Arab prison camps, not in Israel.

Thankfully some aren't forgetting the suffering Jewish refugees endured at the hands of genocidal Muslims. Jerusalem Post, Rights sought for Jewish refugees from Arab lands:

Leaders from all over the Jewish world will convene in Jerusalem for a summit meeting with government officials on Monday to officially launch a worldwide campaign for the registration and recognition of human rights abuses and property losses suffered by Jewish families who were expelled from Arab countries during the 1940s and 1950s.

The International Rights and Redress Campaign, which will be run by the Justice for Jews from Arab Countries (JJAC) organization in partnership with several other American and international Jewish organizations, will focus on registering these families' claims against Arab states for losses and abuses sustained during the expulsions.

However, summit coordinator and JJAC executive director Stanley Urman told The Jerusalem Post that "this isn't primarily about seeking compensation." Rather, it is "about registration and recognition and Jewish history."

Yet while the JJAC seeks first and foremost to tell "the story of Jewish history before the memories [of the expelled Jews] fade," the campaign is also intended to prepare for the filing of compensation claims against Arab states.

"We have to also catalogue losses," Urman affirms. "There may be a time when Palestinians demand compensation, and we believe... it would be an injustice to provide rights to one victimized population [the Palestinians] without providing to the other."

This point - placing the Palestinian refugee issue in the context of the broader refugee phenomenon generated by the Arab-Israeli conflict - seems to be the campaign's central political message.

According to Urman, quoted in a JJAC press release, "Two, not one, refugee problems were caused by the strife in the region, and our campaign will insist that the world community recognize the appalling events that befell Jews from Arab countries."

Another press release tellingly noted that "In all relevant international bilateral or multilateral agreements (i.e. UN Resolution 242, the road map, the Madrid Conference, etc.), the reference to 'refugees' is generic, allowing for the recognition and inclusion of all Middle East refugees - Jews, Christians and other minorities."

Urman confirmed this goal to the Post.

"We're working to make sure [world] governments recognize that they [Middle Eastern Jews] were refugees and they have rights as well," he said.

In explaining the timing of the summit, Urman called the current period "our last chance," since "hundreds of these dispossessed Jews are dying every month with virtually no public recognition of either their tragic expulsion or their far-ranging individual and communal property claims."

While Urman declined to quote estimates as to the amount of compensation families of expelled Jews may seek from Arab states, estimates of the World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries (WOJAC) put the figure at some $100 billion.

JJAC was founded in 2002 by a coalition of Jewish organizations, including WOJAC, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and the American Sephardi Federation. It works closely with the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, the Anti-Defamation League, B'nai B'rith International, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and the World Sephardic Congress.

While JJAC and WOJAC will coordinate the International Rights and Redress Campaign, it will operate in conjunction with Jewish organizations from 40 countries from South America, Europe, North America and Asia.

There were more Jewish refugees in 1940-1950 than Palestinian refugees. If we were to count Jewish refugees today the way the UN defines Palestinian refugees, people who had a "normal place of residence" and "who lost both their homes and means of livelihood" we would likely find that Jewish refugees still total a larger number.

Egyptian FM blames Hizbullah for war

Reprinted from the Jerusalem Post, Egyptian FM blames Hizbullah for war:

Oct 22, 2006 12:37
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abu Gheit blamed Hizbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah for the summer's Lebanon war, alleging that the organization had instigated the conflict to flout the 1989 Taif Agreement, under which Lebanon was supposed to disarm Shi'ite groups.

In an interview on Egyptian public television on Saturday night, Abu Gheit said that Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah had begun the war to justify Hizbullah's existence, Israel Radio reported.

The Taif Agreement, negotiated by the surviving members of Lebanon's 1972 parliament, addressed political reform, the ending of the Lebanese Civil War, the establishment of special relations between Lebanon and Syria, and a basis for Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, passed in 2004, echoed many elements of the Taif Agreement, calling for Lebanese sovereignty over all of its land and called upon "foreign forces" to withdraw from Lebanon and to cease intervening in Lebanese politics. The resolution also called on all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias to disband and declared support for a "free and fair electoral process".

More MSM Misinformation

When seven Palestinian terrorists were shot and killed by the IDF on Monday, both the BBC and Reuters chose to take reports from Palestinians over those from the IDF. Reuters, of course, relied upon its favorite Muslim journalist, Nidal al-Mughrabi. As a Muslim and a Palestinian there is a clear conflict of interest with al-Mughrabi reporting on Israeli affairs. Not to mention his long history of biased, anti-Israel reporting and involvement with Palestinian groups. More information on Nidal al-Mughrabi here, here, and here.

The real story, by Jerusalem Post. IDF troops kill seven Palestinian gunmen in northern Gaza:

IDF troops operating the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanun on Monday shot and killed seven Palestinian gunmen and wounded 14, Palestinian hospital officials said.

The IDF said it was operating against Palestinian operatives on a mission to launch Kassam rockets at southern Israel, and that several armed men were hit. Palestinian security said the troops opened fire on a group of Palestinians.

What did Mr. al-Mughrabi of Reuters report? Israel kills seven in Gaza battle: Palestinian officials:

GAZA (Reuters) - Israeli forces killed seven Palestinians, including at least three gunmen, and wounded about 20 people in fighting in the Gaza Strip on Monday, Palestinian officials said.
It must be a Palestinian magic trick! It went down from seven terrorists to three. Then again, look at where al-Mughrabi got his information - "Palestinian officials."

And the Beeb, Seven dead in 'Israeli Gaza raid':
Seven Palestinians including a senior militant figure have been killed in clashes with Israeli troops in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian officials said.
It went down from seven, to three, to one. A prime example of the bias in the BBC and MSM. And, yet again, we see the Beeb relying on these mysterious "Palestinian officials." For those who aren't aware, the only officials in Palestinian areas are members of terrorist groups such as Fatah and Hamas.

BBC demonizes the Mossad

The BBC, now admittedly biased against Jews, depicted Mossad agents as a bloodthirsty gang of thugs in it's series Spooks. YNet, Mossad angry over British espionage series:

The Mossad is furious at a popular British espionage drama series, or so says the 'Sunday Express. The British daily reported Sunday that senior Mossad agents were so angry with the way their organization was depicted in the BBC production 'Spooks' that they decided to take the matter to the British secret service.

High-ranking Mossad agents reportedly flew to London to see the last episode, which aired on BBC3 last week.

The episode deals with a large-scale deal between Britain and Saudi Arabia wherein Britain is promised an unlimited supply of fuel for handing over plutonium to the Saudis. Mossad agents attempt to thwart the deal, and are seen shooting bound and blindfolded prisoners in the back...

..."This show makes us look like gang of thugs who are no different than the terrorists we're fighting," an unnamed Mossad agent told the 'Sunday Express'.

The next libelous show on the BBC's horizon includes, without a doubt, Jews dipping Passover matzo in the blood of babies.

Monday, October 23, 2006

Self-hating Ha'aretz defends Islamic oppression of women

Bradley Burston of the far-left Ha'aretz newspaper wrote an article asserting that there was a 'new inquisition' on Muslims in Europe and the Western world. The Otter sums it up like this: Poor innocent Muslims are being oppressed in the West by being asked to remove the ski masks and beekeeper suits. The horror!

The article doesn't mention the fact that virtually all Islamic women are coerced into wearing veils by a violent, chauvinistic culture. It doesn't mention the fact that Muslim veils and coverings hinder daily life and social relationships. Burston didn't discuss the fact that Muslims react violently to even the most innocent questioning of their religion. Even when he quoted Conservative Party member David Davis, who said that veils divide society like voluntary apartheid, he failed to address the divisiveness of wearing veils.

Of course the clincher of his article was this statement; "Scarves don't explode. Veils do not kill. The niqab does not incite."

Islam 'explodes'. Islam kills. Islam incites. Veils, niquabs, burkas, chadors, and other Islamic coverings are the trappings of Islam. By endorsing them on any level you endorse terrorism. You endorse suicide bombing, oppression of women, and apartheid. It's almost certain we will see Muslim riots due to the current veil row.
Did Burston forget about the dozens killed due to Muhammad cartoons and vague Papal comments? When innocent people are killed by violent Muslims frothing over the veil, will Bradley Burston still be able to say veils don't kill?

BBC hails 'martyrdom' of children in suicide attack

In a recent suicide attack, two children and a British marine were murdered. It's always sad to see innocent lives taken by the vile scum of Islam, but what makes this even worse is that the BBC hailed the two children as having been "martyred." BBC, bombing kills children and marine:
Meanwhile, a policeman has died in an attack in Khost province. The Taleban and their allies have been blamed for a rise in the number of suicide attacks.

'Children martyred'

The explosion in Lashkar Gah took place in the town centre, near the governor's compound.
Note that "children martyred" is a subheading from the BBC. At first I assumed it was a quote from another location in the article. It wasn't. When I checked, it didn't occur anywhere. It would appear that "children martyred" is the assertion of the BBC. Calling innocent victims "martyrs" is not a far stretch from the BBC's current policy of refusing to print the word "terrorism."

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Update: Phosphorous & Fair Reporting

A far cry from the one-sided reporting on Israel's use of phosphorous by the BBC and Ha'aretz, MSNBC and the Associated Press deliver the full scope of events. Israel used phosphorous on Hezbollah targets, not civilian populations, which is fully legal. MSNBC, Israel admits use of phosphorous:
JERUSALEM - The Israeli army dropped phosphorous bombs on Hezbollah guerrilla targets during their war in Lebanon this summer, an Israeli Cabinet minister said Sunday, confirming Lebanese allegations for the first time.

Until now, Israel had said it only used the weapons — which cause severe chemical burns — to mark targets or territory, according to Israeli media reports.

But Cabinet Minister Yaakov Edri said Israel used the weapons before an Aug. 14 cease-fire went into effect, ending its 34-day war against Hezbollah. Edri said he was speaking on behalf of Defense Minister Amir Peretz, according to his spokeswoman, Orly Yehezkel.

“The Israeli army holds phosphorous munitions in different forms,” Edri said. “The Israeli army made use of phosphorous shells during the war against Hezbollah in attacks against military targets in open ground.”

The Lebanese government accused Israel of dropping phosphorous bombs during the war. Edri did not specify where or against what types of targets the bombs were used.

White phosphorous is a translucent wax-like substance with a pungent smell that, once ignited, creates intense heat and smoke. The Geneva Conventions ban using white phosphorous against civilians or civilian areas.

The United States acknowledged last year that U.S. troops used white phosphorous as a weapon against insurgent strongholds during the battle of Fallujah in November 2004, but said it had never been used against civilian targets.

Israel is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions. The Israeli military said in July its use of weapons “conforms with international law” and it investigates claims of violations based on the information provided.

Ha'aretz and the BBC made no mention of the fact that phosphorous was used on military targets. Ha'aretz even refused to acknowledge the fact that phosphorous is legal unless used on civilian targets. However it would appear that MSNBC deserves to be commended for telling the full story, this time.

Did Israel violate Geneva Conventions?

With the recent admission by cabinet minister Jacob Edery that Israel used phosphorous bombs in the Second Lebanon War the question is being tossed around - did Israel break international law? A short answer, no. Despite attempts by the mainstream media to depict Israel as having engaged in war crimes, no war crimes were committed by the Jewish State. The use of phosphorous bombs is not outlawed in the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions, instead, outlaw the use of phosphorous bombs against a civilian population. Just like they outlaw the use of any weapons against a civilian population. Israel used phosphorous weapons against military targets, which is completely legal. The real outcry is from liberal "human rights" (pro-terrorist) groups and governments who don't like to see Israel defend herself.

However, the very existence of Hezbollah as an armed group is against international law (UN Resolution 1559) . So is Hezbollah's main tactic, launching rockets indiscriminately into civilian centers. Yet more attention has been placed on Israel's use of legal, but questionable, weapons than on the blatantly illegal actions of a terrorist group.

Let's look at a few examples of distortion in the mainstream media.

From Israel's liberal, self-hating Ha'aretz newspaper:
At the same time, soldiers in the artillery corps testified that the IDF used phosphorous shells, which many experts say is prohibited by international law. According to the claims, the overwhelming majority of the weapons mentioned were fired during the last ten days of the war.
Many experts say that phosphorous shells are prohibited by international law? Which experts are these? Even the BBC, notorious for its bias against Israel, admitted that the use of phosphorous weapons only violated international law if used against civilian populations:
The Geneva Conventions ban the use of white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon against civilian populations and in air attacks against military forces in civilian areas.
So which is it? Two anti-Israel newspapers contradicted one another. Is phosphorous against international law or only illegal when used against civilian populations?

Nowhere in the Geneva Conventions does it explicitly outlaw phosphorous weapons. Rather, phosphorous weapons are limited in the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Protocol III limits the use of incendiary weapons. Phosphorous can be considered an incendiary weapon. Keep in mind the Geneva Conventions do not outlaw incendiary weapons, but only limit their use. Here is the full text of Protocol III:
  1. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make the civilian population as such, individual civilians or civilian objects the object of attack by incendiary weapons.
  2. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by air-delivered incendiary weapons.
  3. It is further prohibited to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by means of incendiary weapons other than air-delivered incendiary weapons, except when such military objective is clearly separated from the concentration of civilians and all feasible precautions are taken with a view to limiting the incendiary effects to the military objective and to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.
  4. It is prohibited to make forests or other kinds of plant cover the object of attack by incendiary weapons except when such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or other military objectives, or are themselves military objectives.
So unless Israel used phosphorous weapons on civilian targets, military targets located within a concentration of civilians not clearly separated from the concentration of civilians, didn't attempt to limit the incendiary effects or minimize incidental loss of life or damage to civilian objects, or burned down forests with incendiary weapons, then it wasn't illegal.

Israeli cabinet minister Jacob Edery made it clear that phosphorous weapons were used only against military targets in open areas. By the criteria listed in the Geneva Conventions, Israel's use of phosphorous was one hundred percent legal.

Israel refuses to capitulate to Lebanese impotency

Despite French and Lebanese threats to shoot down Israeli aircraft in Lebanon, Israel stated that it would continue to carry out strikes against terrorists. And despite a UN resolution stating terrorist groups in Lebanon must be disarmed, including Hezbollah, and despite Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon, the Lebanese government and UN peacekeepers have continued to allow weapon shipments to terrorist groups operating on Lebanese soil. MSNBC, Israel says flights over Lebanon will continue:
JERUSALEM - Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz said Sunday that air force flights over Lebanon would continue because arms smuggling to Lebanese guerrillas has not stopped.

Peretz made the statement to Israel's Cabinet after the commander of the U.N. peacekeeping force in Lebanon termed the overflights a clear violation of the U.N. resolution that ended Israel's monthlong summer war with Hezbollah fighters.

In his remarks, Peretz accused the Lebanese government of failing to carry out its obligations under the resolution to keep weapons from reaching Hezbollah from its Syrian and Iranian backers.

"The accumulating intelligence in our hands points to a rising effort to transfer arms," and so "the legitimacy for overflights increases," Peretz said.

The U.N. cease-fire resolution, which went into effect on Aug. 14, calls for both sides to respect the U.N. boundary drawn in 2000 after Israel ended its 18-year occupation of southern Lebanon.

Israel says it has no choice but to conduct flights across that line because arms continue to flow to Hezbollah and due to the guerrilla group's continued armed presence in southern Lebanon, which, under the resolution, is to become a weapons-free zone.

Up to 15,000 Lebanese army troops and an equal number of U.N. troops have been assigned to create this zone. Last week, Maj. Gen. Alain Pellegrini, leader of the U.N. peacekeeping force, criticized Israel for sending its jets over the area.

Peretz, in response, said on Sunday that the U.N. force was "designed to operate against Hezbollah, not Israel."

"As long as the resolution isn't implemented, there is no other choice" but to keep flying over Lebanon, he said.

Religion of Peace intimidates to silence

The British Commission for Racial Equality discouraged debate regarding the Muslim veil issue, stating that it could trigger riots and violence. Jerusalem Post, UK watchdog: Muslim veil debate could spark riots:

The heated debate over veils that cover the faces of some British Muslim women is growing ugly and could trigger riots, the head of Britain's race relations watchdog warned Sunday.

Britons are becoming increasingly polarized along racial and religious lines, and if they don't talk respectfully about their differences, bad feeling will mount and could fuel unrest, Commission for Racial Equality chairman Trevor Phillips wrote in The Sunday Times newspaper.

An angry debate "is the last thing Britain needs," wrote Phillips, whose commission is an independent, government-funded body created by law in 1976 and charged with fighting discrimination and encouraging good race relations.

"This could be the trigger for the grim spiral that produced riots in the north of England five years ago. Only this time the conflict would be much worse. We need to chill," he wrote.

It's a real shame that the Western world is capitulating to Islamic scare tactics. The fact is that an angry debate is exactly what we need. The world needs to put its foot down and let Muslims know that we can debate and discuss any issue that we want. Including Islamic veils or Muhammad (Pork and Beans Upon Him). If Muslims want to riot, let them. Let them get their heads split open by the business end of a bobby's baton.

Terrorist leader killed

Hamas seems to be helping Israel - by killing rival terrorists. The leader of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades was gunned down outside his residence by what appeared to be members of the competing terrorist group, Hamas. Civil war between terrorist groups in the Occupied Territories has been looming for months. BBC, Gunmen kill leading Fatah figure:
Mohammed Shahadeh, leader of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the camp, was shot outside his home, officials say.

Fatah officials blamed Hamas for the killing - the latest in the current stand-off between the two Palestinian rivals that has left about 20 dead.
It begs the question, "If a Muslim terrorist is killed by another Muslim terrorist is he still considered a martyr?"

Saturday, October 21, 2006

Further Reuters distortion

In a Saturday raid in Gaza, Israeli forces exchanged fire with Palestinian terrorists. One terrorist was killed.

However, Reuters reported that one 50 year old civilian was killed in the exchange on fire. Reuters' report was based upon Palestinian resident and hospital claims. And we all know how reliable Palestinian sources are (cough, Pallywood, cough). The headline for Reuters was, Israeli forces kill Palestinian in Gaza raid. Here is a short excerpt (highlights mine):

By Nidal al-Mughrabi

GAZA (Reuters) - Israeli forces killed a Palestinian civilian during a raid in southern Gaza on Saturday, hospital officials and residents said, as the army pressed on with a four-month-old offensive against militants.

An Israeli army spokesman said troops clashed with militants during an operation near the Sufa Crossing in the southern Gaza Strip, adding one gunman was hit. He had no further details.

Hospital officials said the dead civilian was a man aged 50. Residents said he was shot and killed by soldiers.

So it appears that a trusty Islamic Reuters reporter, Nidal al-Mughrabi, decided to take the word of Palestinian residents over the official military report. Let's see what the IDF really had to say. Jerusalem Post, Palestinian killed in Gaza was a gunman:
In response to Palestinian reports that the IDF had killed a 50-year-old Palestinian civilian during operations in the Gaza Strip early Saturday, the IDF confirmed it was operating the area, but said it had killed a gunman during an exchange of fire with Palestinian terror operatives.
So it turns out that the only person killed was a gunman. Reuters, you've been caught lying again. We would have expected some reform after the fake photos, the pandering to terrorists, and the physical violence against Israeli troops. Shame on you Reuters. And shame on Nidal al-Mughrabi.

Iran condemned for student McCarthyism

Human Rights Watch is stunning the world this week. First it condemned Hezbollah for it's use of cluster bombs in the Second Lebanon War, next it condemned Iran for banning students who have dissenting political views. Usually HRW ignores Muslim countries; it's too busy attacking Israel 24/7. BBC News, Iran should stop student bans:
Iran must stop banning students from university because of their political views, a human rights group has said.

Human Rights Watch says some students have been barred from registering for university places despite passing the relevant entrance exams.

It said others have been offered places only if they promise to refrain from peaceful political protests.

Human Rights Watch said the Iranian government wanted to coerce students into silence and submission.

Iran paid Hamas $50m to kidnap Shalit

According to Israeli ambassador Dan Gillerman, Iran bribed Hamas for the kidnapping of Cpl Gilad Shalit in June. BBC News, Iran blocks Israel soldier deal:
Israel's ambassador to the UN has accused Iran of paying Hamas $50m to block the release of an Israeli soldier captured by Palestinian militants.
(Photo right: Gilad Shalit. Shalit was kidnapped June 25, 2006 by the terrorist group Hamas)

Nazis march on German jail

BBC, Neo-Nazis gather for Berlin march:
More than 1,200 neo-Nazis from across Europe are due to march on Berlin's Tegel Prison to demand the release of a jailed singer.

German neo-Nazi Michael Regener, aka "Lunikoff", is in jail for three years after a court ruled his band Landser was spreading racial hatred.

In March 2005, a German court rejected an appeal by Regener to have his sentence repealed.

Germany has strict laws against promoting Nazism or using Nazi symbols.

Three years ago, a Berlin court found Landser - meaning "foot soldiers" - guilty of spreading hatred of Jewish people and foreigners in Germany.
Idiotarians defend neo-Nazi groups under the guise of free speech. However, hate speech should not be protected. Not in Europe and not in the Untied States. It's illegal to walk into a crowded movie theater and shout 'fire' because it can result in damage, injury, and death. So why shouldn't it be illegal to hold extremist neo-Nazi rallies? Or advocate the murder of Jews in song lyrics? Those also cause damage, injury, and death.

We don't allow terrorist groups to congregate and spread propaganda so we shouldn't allow neo-Nazis; it's a movement tantamount to terrorism.

Friday, October 20, 2006

Pentagon admits Qur'an causes terrorism

Despite previous claims that Islamic terrorism was not the result of Islam, but rather a perversion of Islam, a Pentagon report stated that the Qur'an is at the heart of Islamic terrorism. World Net Daily, Suicide bombers follow Qur'an, concludes Pentagon briefing:
With suicide bombings spreading from Iraq to Afghanistan, the Pentagon has tasked intelligence analysts to pinpoint what's driving Muslim after Muslim to do the unthinkable.

Their preliminary finding is politically explosive: it's their "holy book" the Quran after all, according to intelligence briefings obtained by WND.

In public, the U.S. government has made an effort to avoid linking the terrorist threat to Islam and the Quran while dismissing suicide terrorists as crazed heretics who pervert Islamic teachings.

"The terrorists distort the idea of jihad into a call for violence and murder," the White House maintains in its recently released "National Strategy for Combating Terrorism" report.

But internal Pentagon briefings show intelligence analysts have reached a wholly different conclusion after studying Islamic scripture and the backgrounds of suicide terrorists. They've found that most Muslim suicide bombers are in fact students of the Quran who are motivated by its violent commands – making them, as strange as it sounds to the West, "rational actors" on the Islamic stage.
Finally some honesty! The fact that Islam is the prime motive in Islamic terror is something everybody knows but is afraid to admit. It's something that we've known in the academic world, too, despite many liberals muddying the waters with their one-sided defense of Islam. As an academic I expect more honesty out of universities, so it pains me to see liberals using the classroom as a pro-Islam and anti-American pulpit. I can understand it from the political realm where honesty costs votes. Not that I support it. I just understand it. Thus are the evils of political correctness.

It's always good to see an academic who isn't afraid to come out and say it - Islam causes terrorism. Not poverty, not politics, not a broken home, but Islam. Essential reading on this subject is David Bukay's paper, "The Religious Foundations of Suicide Bombings."
Suicide terrorism has been the scourge of the last quarter century. A suicide bomb attack on the U.S. marine barracks in Beirut compelled Ronald Reagan in 1983 to withdrawal peacekeepers from Beirut. Palestinian leaders deploy suicide bombers to force Israeli concessions, and Iraqi insurgents use suicide bombings to derail the new political order. Al-Qaeda terrorists attacked the U.S.S. Cole in Aden in 2000 and, on September 11, 2001, the World Trade Center and Pentagon. While some scholars argue there is no religious component to suicide bombing—often citing Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, who are not Muslims—they are wrong. All Muslim suicide bombers justify their actions with their religion and, more specifically, with the concept of jihad.

About me

  • Contact at AriRabin01@aim.com - Instant Message (AIM) at AriRabin01
My profile