How is this an American concern? Also, can you find any documentation from say, The UN, or any reputable body? The KLWCT is an Islamic/Malaysian organization and not known for their truthfulness or accuracy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_War_Crimes_Commission On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 7:58 AM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> wrote: > *The perpetrators [State of Israel] had committed acts against the > Palestinians, with intent to kill, cause serious bodily or mental harms and > deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to bring about the > physical destruction of the Palestinians as a whole or in part.”* > > > *“The Tribunal recommends to the War Crimes Commission to give the widest > international publicity to this conviction and grant of reparations, as > these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon nations > to institute prosecutions.* > > *The Tribunal deplores the failure of international institutions to punish > the State of Israel for its crimes and its total lack of respect of > International Law and the institutions of the United Nations.” * > > > *THE KUALA LUMPUR WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL* > *20 – 25 NOVEMBER 2013* > *Case No. 3 – CHG – 2013* > > *The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission* > *Against* > *Amos Yaron* > *Case No. 4 – CHG – 2013* > > *The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission* > *Against* > *The State of Israel* > > .. > > The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (Tribunal) reconvened on 20 November > 2013 to hear two charges against Amos Yaron (first Defendant) and the State > of Israel (second Defendant). The first Defendant was charged with war > crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, whilst the second Defendant > was charged with the crime of genocide and war crimes. > > The charge against the first Defendant is as follows – > > “The Defendant Amos Yaron perpetrated War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, > and Genocide in his capacity as the Commanding Israeli General in military > control of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Israeli occupied Lebanon > in September of 1982 when he knowingly facilitated and permitted the > large-scale Massacre of the Residents of those two camps in violation of > the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907; the Fourth Geneva Convention > of 1949; the 1948 Genocide Convention; the Nuremberg Charter (1945), the > Nuremberg Judgment (1946), and the Nuremberg Principles (1950); customary > international law, jus cogens, the Laws of War, and International > Humanitarian Law” > > The charge against the second Defendant [State of Israel] is as follows – > > “From 1948 and continuing to date the State of Israel (hereafter ‘the > Defendant’) carried out against the Palestinian people a series of acts > namely killing, causing serious bodily harm and deliberately inflicting > conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction. > > The conduct of the Defendant was carried out with the intention of > destroying in whole or in part the Palestinian people. These acts were > carried out as part of a manifest pattern of similar conduct against the > Palestinian people. > > These acts were carried out by the Defendant through the instrumentality > of its representatives and agents including those listed in Appendices 1 > and 2. > > Such conduct constitutes the Crime of Genocide under international law > including the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide 1948 > (‘the Genocide Convention’) in particular Article II and punishable under > Article III of the said Convention. > > It also constitutes the crime of genocide as stipulated in Article 10 of > the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War. > > Such conduct by the Defendant as an occupying power also violates > customary international law as embodied in the Hague Convention of 1907 > Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, and the Fourth Geneva > Convention of 1949. > > Such conduct also constitutes War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity under > international law.” > > The charges (together with the particulars of the charges) had been duly > served on the Defendants, and were read in open court by the Registrar as > these proceedings commenced. > > Neither Defendant was present in these proceedings, but both were > represented by the Amicus Curiae-Defence Team. > > *Read Complete > <http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/KLJUDGMENT.pdf> > Judgment > (pdf) > <http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/KLJUDGMENT.pdf>* > > *Selected Excerpts* > > *2 Prosecution’s Case* > > The Prosecution’s case against the first Defendant is that the first > Defendant had committed War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, and Genocide > in his capacity as the Commanding Israeli General in military control of > the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Israeli-occupied Lebanon in > September of 1982 when he knowingly facilitated and permitted the > large-scale Massacre of the Residents of those two camps. These crimes were > in violation of, inter alia, the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, the 1948 > Genocide Convention, jus cogens, International Humanitarian Law; and > Articles 9, 10, and 11 of the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to > Criminalise War. > > The Prosecution’s case against the second Defendant is that from 1948 and > continuing to date the State of Israel had systematically carried out > against the Palestinian people a series of acts namely killing, causing > serious bodily harm and deliberately inflicting conditions of life > calculated to bring about physical destruction – with the intention of > destroying in whole or in part the Palestinian people. > > These acts constitute the Crime of Genocide under international law > including the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide 1948 > (‘the Genocide Convention’) in particular Article II and punishable under > Article III of the said Convention. It also constitutes the crime of > genocide as stipulated in Article 10 of the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur > Foundation to Criminalise War. > > In his opening statement, the Chief Prosecutor Prof Gurdial Singh said > that the Prosecution will adduce evidence to prove the counts in the > indictment through oral and written testimonies of victims, witnesses, > historical records, narrative in books and authoritative commentaries, > resolutions of the United Nations and reports of international bodies. > > *6. The Defence case* > > Mr. Jason Kay Kit Leon of the Amicus Curiae-Defence Team submitted that in > the charges against the two Defendants, the Prosecution had listed war > crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace. Apparently the > Prosecution had abandoned these charges, concentrating only on genocide. > > He said that the offence of genocide is defined in Article 2 of the > Genocide Convention 1948, whilst the OED defines it simply as “the > deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a > particular nation or ethnic group”. > > He submitted that the charge of genocide is unique; it means that you > don’t like a group, you kill them; you kill them in a grand manner. > Genocide means that at the end of the act, you have a lesser number of > victims than before the genocide started. > > He further submitted that when one talks of “massive killing”, it is many > hundreds of thousands to millions of people. To suggest that an isolated > event, the unfortunate murder of 3,000 people (Sabra and Shatila) is the > same as massive killing is almost disrespectful of the true horror of > massive killing (as in Rwanda, where 800,000 people were killed in 100 > days). > > With regard to the Kahan Report, the Amicus Curiae-Defence Team said that > it also identified other people as being responsible, with two other names > other than Yaron still alive. The question is why only Yaron was charged? > Why was Defence Minister Ariel Sharon spared? > > He also submitted that the PLO had repeatedly violated the July 1981 > cease-fire agreement. By June 1982, when the IDF went into Lebanon, the PLO > had made life in northern Israel intolerable through its repeated shelling > of Israeli towns. > > On Cast Lead, the Amicus Curiae-Defence Team submitted that the IDF had > come out with two reports. The point is if you are going to kill people > nilly willy, you do not report it. > > On the issue of the wall, the Amicus Curiae-Defence Team submitted that > the primary consideration is one of security of the Israeli settlers. The > State of Israel has a duty to defend their lives, safety and well-being. > > On the issue of checkpoints, the Amicus Curiae-Defence Team said countries > have a right to immigration laws. With regard to Plan Dalet, the Amicus > Curiae-Defence Team said that it is subject to divergent opinions, with > historians on one side asserting that it was entirely defensive, while > other historians assert that the plan aimed at an ethnic cleansing. > > *4. Prosecution’s closing submission* > > In his closing submission, the Chief Prosecutor said that he had called 11 > witnesses (some of whom had testified through Skype), tendered 15 exhibits > and furnished several documents and reports to the Tribunal during the > course of the proceedings. > > He urged the Tribunal to bear in mind that this is a Tribunal of > Conscience and the case before it is an extraordinary case, which Winston > Churchill used to call as a “crime without a name”. > > He said that the Prosecution had provided evidence of facts which, > examined as a whole, will show that the perpetrators had committed acts > against the Palestinians, with intent to kill, cause serious bodily or > mental harms and deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to > bring about the physical destruction of the Palestinians as a whole or in > part. > > From the testimony of Prof Pappe (PW8) the Prosecution had shown that > before 1948, before UN Resolution 47, there was already a plan in place to > take over the Palestinian territory, and this plan would be activated the > moment the British relinquished its mandate over the territory. > > At that point in time, the Palestinians were on 94% of the land, with the > Jewish population settling over a mere 6% of the land. Under the UN > partition plan, more than 50% of the land was to be given to the Jews. > > Plan Dalet might not legally be genocidal in form at its inception, but as > it took shape the ethnic cleansing metamorphised into killing, massacre and > creating impossible conditions for life for the Palestinians – either they > leave or they die. The Prosecution submits this is genocide within the > meaning of Article 2 of the Genocide Convention. > > On Sabra and Shatila, prosecution witnesses (PW1 and PW6) had testified > that the Palestinian refugees in those camps had been killed by the > Phalangists, aided and abetted by the Israelis who were in complete control > of the two camps. > > According to the Kahan Report, all of Beirut was under Israeli control, > and there was clear symbiotic relationship between Israel and the Christian > forces (the Lebanese Maronite Christian militia or the Phalangists or > Keta’ib). > > On Operation Cast Lead in 2008, the Chief Prosecutor said that the Israeli > Defence Force had used all kinds of weapons, including white phosphorus – > which is an incendiary weapon. The use of incendiary weapons is prohibited > under Protocal III on the Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of > Incendiary Weapons. > > As a result of the Israeli occupation of Gaza, nowhere in Gaza is safe for > civilians. 1.5 million Palestinians are now trapped in despair, their > fragile economy ruined. Under the Dahiya Doctrine (October 2008), the > complete destruction of Gaza is the ultimate objective, the whole place > must be flattened. > > The Prosecution submits that the cumulative effect of the actions taken by > the Israeli government, as shown by the Prosecution witnesses and the > several documents tendered to the Tribunal, have shown beyond reasonable > doubt that Israel is guilty of the crime of genocide under the Genocide > Convention and the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (The > Charter). > > Co-Prosecutor Tan Sri Abdul Aziz, submitting on the first charge against > Amos Yaron, said that Amos Yaron was the commanding officer in charge of > the Israeli Defence Force, in charge of the area of Beirut, and camps Sabra > and Shatila. He said there were two issues which he has to deal with – > first, whether or not there was a large scale massacre of the 10 residents > of the two camps, and second, whether or not Amos Yaron facilitated and > permitted such massacre, in violation of international law and Articles 9, > 10 and 11 of the Charter? > > On the first issue, he submitted there was a large scale massacre, as > testified by PW1. She was there, and she saw the massacre with her own > eyes. There was corrobating testimony by PW6, and further acknowledged in > the Kahan Report. > > On the second issue, Amos Yaron was in charge, to ensure that there would > be peace and law and order. The Kahan Report itself concluded that anybody > who knew about Lebanon would know that by releasing the Phalangists into > Beirut, there would be massacre. Surely, Amos Yaron, the General in charge, > must have known that by allowing the Phalangists to go into the two camps, > the massacre would take place. But he decided to do nothing. > > He received the reports of the killing of women and children, but he did > not check the report. He did not pass the report to his superiors. The > co-prosecutor submits that by ignoring all this despite knowing the > circumstances, he himself had the intention of causing the death of the > people in the two camps. > > *10.3 Commission’s Register of War Criminals* > > Further, under Article 35 of the same Chapter, this Tribunal recommends to > the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission that the names of the two convicted > parties herein be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War > Criminals and be publicised accordingly. > > 10.4 The Tribunal recommends to the War Crimes Commission to give the > widest international publicity to this conviction and grant of reparations, > as these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon > nations to institute prosecutions. > > 10.5 The Tribunal deplores the failure of international institutions to > punish the State of Israel for its crimes and its total lack of respect of > International Law and the institutions of the United Nations. It urges the > Commission to use all means to publicise this judgement and in particular > with respect to the Parliaments and Legislative Assemblies of the major > powers such as members of the G8 and to urge these countries to intervene > and put an end to the colonialist and racist policies of the State of > Israel and its supporters. > > > On Monday, January 26, 2015 at 5:46:38 PM UTC-6, KeithInTampa wrote: >> >> I don't expect you to answer because this same type of question has been >> posed to you on numerous occasions, and here once again it proves your >> ignorance, but for the Group; please demonstrate, give examples, or even >> your opinion of "*israel's genocidal aggression toward goyim in israel"* >> >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:27 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> the world is just supposed to sit back, and accept acts of violence and >>> aggression against Western Culture and Societies? >>> --- >>> no more than we're supposed to accept israel's genocidal aggression >>> toward goyim in israel. >>> >>> so, since you have sided with the zionists, when are you self-deporting >>> to israel? >>> >>> On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 6:51:56 PM UTC-6, KeithInTampa wrote: >>>> >>>> *Writing on the wall? * >>>> >>>> Without wishing to appear callous, the carnage in Paris could hardly be >>>> considered unexpected. In many ways the writing has been on the wall for >>>> several years. >>>> >>>> After all, it comes in the wake of a string of incidents of murderous >>>> Islamic-motivated violence across the country. >>>> >>>> In mid-March 2012, several off-duty soldiers were gunned down in >>>> Montauban and Toulouse by a French-born Muslim of Algerian origin. >>>> >>>> A few days later, he slaughtered a rabbi and three children, aged three >>>> to eight, in an attack on a Jewish day school in Toulouse. >>>> >>>> What totally goofy shit....So? Under this "theory"; the world is just >>>> supposed to sit back, and accept acts of violence and aggression against >>>> Western Culture and Societies? >>>> >>>> Typical far left extremist Moonbat! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 7:06 PM, plainolamerican <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0tGbiFbF6w >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ntHNQIkQSw >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ibKWVTFSak >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VrmWgkeIVE >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, January 25, 2015 at 9:50:49 AM UTC-6, Travis wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://jerusalemchannel.tv/islam-terror-rainfall-flooding/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Islam is to Terror as Rainfall is to Flooding >>>>>> >>>>>> admin <http://jerusalemchannel.tv/author/admin/> / January 23, 2015 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [image: Internet screenshot of Islamic State (ISIS) terror tactics on >>>>>> the move] >>>>>> <http://jerusalemchannel.tv/islam-terror-rainfall-flooding/> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Internet screenshot of Islamic State (ISIS) terror tactics on the >>>>>> move* >>>>>> >>>>>> *Into the Fray >>>>>> <http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Into-the-fray-Its-Islam-stupid-387171>: >>>>>> It’s >>>>>> Islam, stupid!* >>>>>> >>>>>> *By Martin Sherman (reprinted with the author’s permission)* >>>>>> >>>>>> *One out six people all over the world is a Muslim… trying to say >>>>>> anything in general about this huge community – 1.5 billion people – will >>>>>> be wrong… The vast majority of these populations are not involved with >>>>>> all >>>>>> what’s happening with violence and terror all over the world…. I don’t >>>>>> think there is anything essential that connects between this huge and >>>>>> historically important religion and all the terrorism that’s going on.* >>>>>> – Sami Abu Shehadeh, secretary-general of Balad, Tel Aviv-Jaffa >>>>>> >>>>>> With these words, Sami Abu Shehadeh, of the anti-Zionist Arab party >>>>>> Balad, commenced a debate with me on “The rise of anti-Muslim sentiment >>>>>> in >>>>>> the West,” which took place in the i24 News studios last month. >>>>>> >>>>>> Clearly, recent events in Paris, in which 12 people were brutally >>>>>> gunned down, gave the topic new and urgent relevance. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Islam is to terror as rainfall is to flooding * >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course, there is much truth in Abu Shehadeh’s claim that most >>>>>> Muslims are not actively involved in terrorism. While this claim is >>>>>> factually correct, substantively it is meaningless. >>>>>> >>>>>> For anyone with an iota of intellectual integrity and reasonably >>>>>> informed of world affairs, the answer to whether Islam and violence and >>>>>> terrorism are causally connected should be unequivocally clear. To ask >>>>>> whether Islam is associated with terrorism is a little like asking if >>>>>> rainfall is associated with flooding. Of course it is – as can be >>>>>> irrefutably deduced from Abu Shehadeh’s attempt to exonerate it. >>>>>> >>>>>> After all, if one in six people in the world is a Muslim, it would >>>>>> mean that five out of six are not. Right? So if there were no inordinate >>>>>> affinity of Islam for violence/ terrorism, Muslim acts of terrorism >>>>>> should >>>>>> be one-fifth of those of non-Muslim terrorism – i.e. if Islam had no >>>>>> greater propensity for terrorism, one would have to expect non-Muslim >>>>>> acts >>>>>> of terrorism to be five times (!) those perpetrated by Muslims. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is clearly not the case, and terrorist attacks committed by >>>>>> adherents of Islam far outweigh those carried out by non-Muslims. >>>>>> >>>>>> It would therefore seem that – in stark violation of the protocols of >>>>>> political correctness – there is little choice but to conclude what many >>>>>> in >>>>>> the West sense instinctively: There is a disproportionate causal >>>>>> connection >>>>>> between Islam on the one hand, and acts of ideo-politically motivated >>>>>> violence against civilian populations, i.e. terrorism on the other. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Writing on the wall? * >>>>>> >>>>>> Without wishing to appear callous, the carnage in Paris could hardly >>>>>> be considered unexpected. In many ways the writing has been on the wall >>>>>> for >>>>>> several years. >>>>>> >>>>>> After all, it comes in the wake of a string of incidents of murderous >>>>>> Islamic-motivated violence across the country. >>>>>> >>>>>> In mid-March 2012, several off-duty soldiers were gunned down in >>>>>> Montauban and Toulouse by a French-born Muslim of Algerian origin. >>>>>> >>>>>> A few days later, he slaughtered a rabbi and three children, aged >>>>>> three to eight, in an attack on a Jewish day school in Toulouse. >>>>>> >>>>>> More recently, just before Christmas, France was racked by a spate of >>>>>> “lone wolf” terrorist attacks, in Dijon, Nantes and Tours, which prompted >>>>>> the British Independent to report the incidents under the ominous >>>>>> headline >>>>>> “France gripped by fear at Christmas after third street attack in three >>>>>> days.” (December 23, 2014) In both the Dijon and Tours incidents, the >>>>>> attacker is reported to have shouted “Allahu akbar,” dispelling any >>>>>> suspicion that the assaults were perpetrated by Buddhist extremists. >>>>>> >>>>>> Muslim violence has been simmering in France for years, boiling over >>>>>> regularly around Christmas and New Year, when hundreds of cars are >>>>>> torched >>>>>> in Muslim-majority neighborhoods to usher in the start of the Gregorian >>>>>> year. >>>>>> >>>>>> Typically, reports in the mainstream media studiously avoid mention >>>>>> of any connection between this criminal arson on a massive scale and the >>>>>> culprits’ ethnic origins. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Catalogue of carnage * >>>>>> >>>>>> The slaughter in Paris takes its place in a long list of acts of >>>>>> butchery, all committed in the name of Islam. >>>>>> >>>>>> Consider the following (and decidedly partial) catalogue of carnage, >>>>>> of the gory events that took place across the globe over the past two >>>>>> decades and shocked the world with their brutally. >>>>>> >>>>>> New York – Cataclysmic destruction of the Twin Towers Washington – >>>>>> Attempt to demolish the Pentagon London – Coordinated attack on the >>>>>> public >>>>>> transport system; the beheading of an off duty soldier in broad daylight >>>>>> in >>>>>> full public view Madrid – Bombing of crowded commuter trains at rush hour >>>>>> Nairobi – Seizure of Westgate shopping mall and murder of scores of >>>>>> innocents Burgas, Bulgaria – Bombing of a tourist bus Mumbai – Murderous >>>>>> attack on the Taj Mahal Hotel, Chabad House and other sites Boston – >>>>>> Bombing of the city’s annual marathon Bali – Bombing of crowded tourist >>>>>> locations Buenos Aires – Deadly attacks on Jewish institutions and the >>>>>> Israeli Embassy Ottawa – Assault on the Canadian Parliament Sydney – >>>>>> Recent >>>>>> seizure of a downtown café and murder of two customers In-Amenas, >>>>>> Algeria – >>>>>> Seizure of a gas facility and murder of dozens of civilians Chibock, >>>>>> Nigeria – Abduction of almost 300 schoolgirls, reportedly to serve as sex >>>>>> slaves This bloodcurdling list is in no way complete, and numerous other >>>>>> incidents could be added. It certainly does not include all the attempted >>>>>> attacks that were foiled by security services in various countries, >>>>>> preventing the commission of even more gruesome atrocities by adherents >>>>>> of >>>>>> Islam. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Horrors of intra-Muslim strife * >>>>>> >>>>>> Try as one may, there is no way that, in the modern world, any other >>>>>> faith/creed can be associated with such violence/ terror – in scope, >>>>>> size, >>>>>> frequency or ubiquity of occurrence. >>>>>> >>>>>> But as appalling as Muslim violence against non-Muslims might be, it >>>>>> pales into insignificance when compared to violence between Muslims >>>>>> themselves. >>>>>> >>>>>> It would be impossible to give a comprehensive survey of the >>>>>> intra-Muslim carnage that has raged – and still rages – across vast >>>>>> swathes >>>>>> of the globe, from the shores of the Atlantic Ocean to the islands of >>>>>> Asia-Pacific. A brutally condensed synopsis will have to suffice. >>>>>> >>>>>> Even before the unspeakable barbarism of al-Nusra and Islamic State >>>>>> began to sweep across much of the Levant, merciless massacres of Muslims >>>>>> at >>>>>> the hands of Muslims abounded. >>>>>> >>>>>> For example, in the almost 10-year Algerian civil war, internecine >>>>>> frictions between rival Islamist factions resulted in massive fratricide >>>>>> – >>>>>> with a death toll reaching, by some estimates, 150,000. Acts of >>>>>> unimaginable brutality were perpetrated with entire villages wiped out >>>>>> and >>>>>> victims’ bodies mutilated. >>>>>> >>>>>> Likewise, regular bombings of markets and mosques across countries >>>>>> such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan have produced massive loss of >>>>>> Muslim >>>>>> life at the hands of belligerent brethren – yet hardly generate a >>>>>> footnote >>>>>> in the mainstream media. The intra-Muslim conflict seems so intense and >>>>>> complicated that even a reasonably informed layman would find it almost >>>>>> impossible to figure out who is killing whom, and why… >>>>>> >>>>>> As a gauge of the scope of the slaughter, the Pakistani site Dawn >>>>>> reported in a post titled “Islam at war – with itself” that al-Qaida >>>>>> affiliates and other extreme Islamist groups “have perpetrated >>>>>> indiscriminate violence against civilians…resulting in over 48,000 >>>>>> deaths…” >>>>>> >>>>>> *The majority of Muslims…* >>>>>> >>>>>> The pervasive violence in the Muslim world inevitably raises the >>>>>> question of the general character of Islam and the kind of behavioral >>>>>> patterns it seems to generate. >>>>>> >>>>>> It also raises the thorny question of minority actions vs majority >>>>>> inaction. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thus, while Abu Shehadeh is probably right when he claims that only a >>>>>> minority of Muslims are engaged in abhorrent acts of terrorism, it is >>>>>> highly unlikely they would be able to sustain this activity without the >>>>>> support – or at least the tacit approval – of much larger segments of the >>>>>> population. >>>>>> >>>>>> Even if the majority does not actively endorse the conduct of a >>>>>> delinquent minority, there is little evidence of effective disapproval, >>>>>> let >>>>>> alone active opposition to it. (In this regard one can only hope that the >>>>>> extraordinarily courageous speech by Egypt’s president Abdel Fattah >>>>>> al-Sisi, calling for a “religious revolution,” will prove to be a >>>>>> harbinger >>>>>> of some radical change in the course Islam is currently set upon.) So, >>>>>> although, as Abu Shehadeh contends, it is difficult to formulate accurate >>>>>> generalizations for 1.6 billion people, several edifying measures are >>>>>> available that paint a daunting picture of the views held by much of the >>>>>> Muslim world. >>>>>> >>>>>> The reputable Pew Research Center has conducted numerous in-depth >>>>>> surveys across much of the Muslim world. Its findings show solid – at >>>>>> times, overwhelming – majorities in many countries (and significant >>>>>> minorities in others) in favor of harsh corporal punishments >>>>>> (whipping/amputation) for theft/robbery; death by stoning for adultery; >>>>>> and >>>>>> death for apostasy. >>>>>> >>>>>> With such a propensity for violence as a widely accepted cultural >>>>>> norm, it is not implausible to assume that wide sections of the Muslim >>>>>> population would not find the use of violence and terrorism totally >>>>>> incompatible with their core beliefs. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Attempts at apologetics: The ‘colonialism’ canard * >>>>>> >>>>>> Numerous attempts have been made to explain away much of the >>>>>> prevalence of violence in the Muslim world and conflict with the West. >>>>>> >>>>>> Arguably the most prominent among such apologists was none other than >>>>>> President Barack Obama. In his 2009 “outreach address” in Cairo, he >>>>>> offered >>>>>> the following explanation for the sad state of affairs between the West >>>>>> and >>>>>> Islam which, he alleged, followed “centuries of coexistence and >>>>>> cooperation.” (Really?) Obama suggested that “more recently, tension has >>>>>> been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many >>>>>> Muslims.” >>>>>> >>>>>> This of course holds no water. >>>>>> >>>>>> For while it is true that much of the Middle East was under imperial >>>>>> rule for centuries, this was mostly Muslim imperialism – i.e. the Ottoman >>>>>> Empire. >>>>>> >>>>>> After all, with perhaps the exception of North Africa, Western >>>>>> colonialism was imposed for a relatively short period after World War I, >>>>>> and ended soon after World War II. This hardly seems sufficient to >>>>>> engender >>>>>> the obdurate Islamic enmity we see today. >>>>>> >>>>>> So if complaints are to be lodged regarding colonialist deprivation >>>>>> of Muslim rights and opportunities, shouldn’t they be directed at the >>>>>> Muslim imperialists? Strangely, the the crucibles of today’s most extreme >>>>>> anti-Western Islam were barely touched by colonialism – the Arabian >>>>>> Peninsula and Iran. >>>>>> >>>>>> Although neither has endured any imperial – including Western – rule >>>>>> of any consequence, the former birthed the Sunni-derivative version of >>>>>> Islamic radicalism and the latter the Shia-derivative. This fact sits >>>>>> uneasily with the diagnosis ascribing ongoing tensions between Muslims >>>>>> and >>>>>> the West to colonialism. >>>>>> >>>>>> *No call to ‘Kill for Krishna’? * >>>>>> >>>>>> Moreover, one might well ask why the iniquities of colonialism have >>>>>> not afflicted, say, the Hindu-majority in India, whose people were >>>>>> certainly “denied rights and opportunities” under the yoke of British >>>>>> imperialism in the same way as the Muslims of Pakistan. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yet, somehow we hear no cries of “Kill for Krishna” or “Ganesh is >>>>>> Great” from embittered Hindu terrorists, blowing themselves up in crowded >>>>>> buses, markets, cafes and mosques, as we do across the Muslim world – >>>>>> including in neighboring Pakistan. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nor do we see aggrieved followers of Shiva embarking on a global holy >>>>>> war to subjugate all to the Hindu creed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why has India been able to put its colonial past behind it, and >>>>>> become a vibrant economic juggernaut? Why has it not allowed itself to >>>>>> remain tethered to the past and mired in homicidal frustration? Since by >>>>>> far most victims of Muslim violence are other Muslims, rights and >>>>>> opportunities allegedly denied by foreign occupiers seven decades ago >>>>>> seem >>>>>> a poor explanation for current conduct. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Modernity as culprit? * >>>>>> >>>>>> Some have tried to contend that the onset of modernity and >>>>>> globalization has created a sense of threat to Islamic values, which has >>>>>> precipitated the tensions with the West. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thus, in Cairo, Obama suggested that “the sweeping change brought by >>>>>> modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile >>>>>> to >>>>>> Islamic traditions.” >>>>>> >>>>>> This too is difficult to accept. >>>>>> >>>>>> After all, Islam is the youngest of all major religions, founded >>>>>> centuries – even in some cases, millennia – after Hinduism, Buddhism, >>>>>> Judaism and Christianity. Why would the newest religion find that the >>>>>> developments of modernity threaten its traditions in a manner that, >>>>>> apparently, does not threaten the traditions of faiths far more ancient? >>>>>> Why do they not generate the same tensions with the West that we find in >>>>>> the case of the Muslim faith? Could it perhaps be that Islam is >>>>>> fundamentally incompatible not only with modernity but with anything that >>>>>> is not Islam, and that many cannot – or worse, refuse to – recognize >>>>>> this? >>>>>> >>>>>> *A clarion call * >>>>>> >>>>>> Europe in general and France in particular are on the cusp of a grim, >>>>>> probably gruesome, future. >>>>>> >>>>>> European leaders would do well to heed the clarion call from someone >>>>>> who has intimate knowledge of Islam – the Somalian-born former Dutch MP >>>>>> Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who was forced flee to the US because of threats from >>>>>> Muslims who objected to her criticism of Islam. She warned: “Islam is >>>>>> not a >>>>>> religion of peace. It’s a political theory of conquest that seeks >>>>>> domination by any means it can. Every accommodation of Muslim demands >>>>>> leads >>>>>> to a sense of euphoria and a conviction that Allah is on their side. They >>>>>> see every act of appeasement as an invitation to make fresh demands.” >>>>>> (March 21, 2009) >>>>>> >>>>>> Europe had best heed this dire caveat and tailor its policies >>>>>> accordingly, for if not, the consequences will be dire. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> __._,_.___ >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]> >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Visit Your Group >>>>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmN2RyaTU3BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MjIxOTUwNTc-> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [image: Yahoo! Groups] >>>>>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNG5vcDJjBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQyMjE5NTA1Nw--> >>>>>> • Privacy >>>>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • >>>>>> Unsubscribe • Terms of Use >>>>>> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> >>>>>> >>>>>> __,_._,___ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> -- >>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>> >>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> -- >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>> >>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
