Piotr Bein
Operation Danish Cartoons - a Battle in the War of
Civilizations
Summary
Leads point to the complicity of the Zionist Power
Configuration (ZPC), a global web of Judeocentric power
brokers, in the "Danish cartoons" affair two years ago. The
riots on the second anniversary are likely of the same
authorship. Neither the ZPC persons nor the Danish Islamist
perpetrators of the original operation have borne legal
consequences. The leads remain suppressed in the mainstream
media who emphasize the offensiveness of the images to
majority of Muslims, rather than to radicals. Concerted
re-publications aggravated the crisis, triggering waves of
violence for the second time since 2006. Faced with the
backlash of US-Israeli policies in the Middle East, and
strong criticisms of the US Israel Lobby, ZPC allegedly
strives to win Western public opinion for continuing
genocide in Palestine and (likely nuclear) wars with Iraq
and Syria.
Danish secret services have been collaborating with Mossad,
making it possible to harbour Islamist terrorists and
radicals, tied to international Jihad, as a Trojan Horse in
civilizational war against the Western and Muslim worlds –
from false-flag attacks for Israeli causes, through 9/11 and
"war on terror" (WOT), to immigrant riots. Some neocons and
Mossad co-established secret NATO army, Gladio, and later
Jihad as an ally in ZPC pursuit of the New World Order. The
editor responsible for the publication of the twelve
cartoons is tied to the US neocons, the mainstay of the ZPC.
ZPC-controlled media assured a succes of Operation Danish
Cartoons, but their version doesn't fit some details which
have received publicity in alternative sources. I highlight
in bold the text that is at odds with the politically
correct version, for example, in Wikipedia.
Islamism and its protection in Europe gained, as a result of
ZPC tending to the Trojan Horse. Holocaustianism with its "anti-Semitism"
whip was strenghtened, too. Christianity stands as a net
loser. Should the theory of the ZPC conspiracy turn true,
the Western public would need to re-evaluate the list of
enemies of peace and stability in the world.
Key words: anti-Polonism, Christianity, clash of
civilizations, Danish cartoons, Islam, Israel Lobby, Feliks
Koneczny, Mossad, neoconservatism, universalism, Wikipedia,
Zionist Power Configuration.
When Kaare Bluitgen couldn't find a daring artist to
illustrate his book for children about the Prophet, a main
Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten (JP) called for cartoon
submissions from around forty illustrators to publicize the
tabu. The daily published (30.9.2005) twelve responses with
a commentary, provocatively titled Mohammed's face
even though the pictures didn't show the Prophet. Only some
of the cartoons ("bomb-in-the turban", "reception-of-terrorists-in-heaven")
might offend some Muslims, but Wikipedia
sees the Prophet even in an depiction of a man with a donkey.
In 2003, JP has refused to run lampoons of Jesus, because
they were "offensive".
The media maintains that depiction of Mohammed's face is
prohibited. But even before the cartoon controversy broke
out, Danish imams Fatih Alev and Abdul Wahid Pedersen
concurred that any possible prohibition wouldn't apply to
non-Muslims. Dr. Joergen Baek Simonsen, leader of the Danish
Institute for Culture in Damascus and author of a book on
Islam, reacted:
"The postulated prohibition against images has never been a
general rule for the Islamic world as a whole […] has never
been enforced with the rigor that is being contended [...I]t
is also moderately hysterical when Danish artists state this
as a reason for not wanting to illustrate a book".
The twelve cartoonists
and others, received death threats, allegedly from
extremists. Except for verifiable statements and actions,
there is no proof that phone and email threats came from
Islamists. Alleged SMS messages by Western extremists to
incite burning of Koran wouldn't be iadmissible evidence in
courts, either. False flag stunts have been employed in many
conflicts to discredit the adversary. The cartoon
publications gave an ample opportunity to stir up the
conflict. Muslim religious leaders classed the cartoons as "an
aggressive act that has violated the highest sanctities of
the Muslim people. Moreover it is devastating to the ideal
of convivial dialogue between peoples".
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) appealed
(28.1.2006) to the Muslims to "stay calm and peaceful in the
wake of sacrilegious depiction of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
which has deeply hurt their feelings [...] Islam being the
religion of tolerance, mercy and peace teaches them to
defend their faith through democratic and legal means."
Not all Muslims blamed the West totally. Al-Ittihad in the
United Arab Emirates argued: "The world has come to believe
that Islam is what is practiced by Bin Laden, Zawahiri,
Zarqawi, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafis, and others who
have presented a distorted image of Islam. We must be honest
with ourselves and admit that we are the reason for these
drawings."[8]
Iraq's top Shiite, grand mufti al-Sistani, too,
suggested that militant Muslims were partly guilty of
distorting Islam's image: "Enemies have exploited this [...]
to spread their poison and revive their old hatreds".[9]
An inter-civilizational theorist, Iran's former president
Khatami also blamed Muslims: "we only keep saying offensive
things about liberalism, democracy and modernism".[10]
He deplored violence and extremism in parts of the Islamic
world that stemmed, in his opinion, from Muslim backwardness
and a feeling of humiliation, making understanding and
compromise difficult.[11]
After the February 2008 re-printing of the cartoons, Yemen
Times pointed out to Muslims that when "the offense comes
from a non-Muslim, the measure stipulated in Sharia law is
to ignore and let go [...] what’s precious and sacred to us
doesn’t necessarily hold the same significance for them".
Lack of Muslim piety "has created misunderstandings among
non-Muslims as to the essence of Islam and its position
against violence".[12]
The Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE)
urged Muslims to patiently "confront this malicious campaign,
in a civilized way that embodies the tolerance of Islam and
its lenience in dealing with people."[13]
Danish Muslims
According to JP journalist Ammitzboell and terrorism analyst
Vidino (A&V),[14]
Muslim immigrants settled in the suburb of Denmark's city
Aarhus since the late 1960s. Thirty years on, few Danes
remained in “the ghetto”. The Muslims suffered lower income,
poorer education rates, and a higher crime rate, but debates
over the immigration and integration issues were discouraged
as racism and Islamophobia. By 2001, new immigration laws
precipitated a debate after
Anders Fogh Rasmussen's center-right
Liberal Party, in coalition with the nationalist People's
Party, had ended prolonged left-of-center Social Democratic
rule. Despite the nationalists’ extreme tone, the press and
politicians focused constructively on criminal activities
and welfare benefit abuse by Muslim immigrants, and on the
radical imams in Denmark.
JP participated in the debate, winning a EU award in 2005.
Then JP began to "run a series of stories on radical imams
in Aarhus". A socialist author spoils A&V's nice picture of
JP, whose editor-in-chief has resigned in 2005 after the
newspaper alleged during an election campaign, against his
will, the systematic abuse of welfare rights by
asylum-seekers. JP ran a hoax about a Muslim death-list of
Jews and a smear titled Islam is the Most Belligerent,
shortly before the 2005, cartoon publication. To
Sueddeutsche Zeitung, JP was "a newspaper with an almost
missionary zeal, boasting that it has been successful in
breaking the ideological and political grip of left-wing
liberals over Danish society", becoming "fellow combatants"
of the People’s Party. Frankfurter Rundschau called JP "the
most right-wing of the Danish newspapers, which normally
thrashes anyone who dares to advance a different point of
view."[15]
Director of Freedom of Musical Expression, Marie Korpe
noticed the media focused "on the responses from
ultra-conservative Muslims", but WOT coincided with harsher
Danish immigration laws, which further marginalised the
Muslim minority. The cartoon affair became "a brutal
intellectual and emotional attack on the hearts of already
marginalised Danish Muslims. Ultra-conservative Muslims
around the world used this incident to promote their own
agendas."[16]
"It will radicalize even the moderate Muslims", in the
Middle East and Europe, Iraqi national security adviser
Mouwaffaq al-Rubaie told a conference on Iraq in Copenhagen.[17]
The JP series focused on two Lebanese imams: Raed Hlayhel
and Ahmed Akkari. Hlayhel moved to Denmark on humanitarian
grounds to get medical care for his son but didn’t learn
Danish and began to preach his Wahhabi interpretation of
Islam at a mosque in "the ghetto". He made JP headlines with
decrees that Muslim women should cover themselves from head
to toe and would disqualify themselves from paradise for
caring for physical beauty. Hlayhel teamed up with 28-year
old Akkari whom in 2001 a Danish court convicted of assault
after he almost ripped off the ear of a boy who had removed
Akkari sister's veil. Danish Muslims' peaceful reaction to
JP cartoon publication wasn't enough, and with Akkari's
help, Hlayhel summoned Danish imams to press for an apology
and concessions from JP and the Danish government. His
"you-are-either-with-me-or-against-Islam" ultimatum forced
the imams to comply and get negative publicity or be accused
of insufficient will to defend Islam.
A Palestinian self-described as moderate, imam Ahmed Abu
Laban was frequently seen on Danish TV and in meetings with
government officials. To defend the Prophet's honour, Laban
and Hlayhel created a committee. Hlayhel's press release
about it was a veiled threat demanding JP apology on behalf
of the whole Muslim community, even though JP (16.1.2006)
wrote about 49 Danish Muslims who distanced themselves from
the demand.
Many of the committee's 27 member organizations were empty
fronts or groups with no more than ten members. Screening of
fake signatories left only a few organizations, representing
around 15,000 members, instead of hundreds of thousands
claimed by the Muslim representatives. At least one bogus
Danish Muslim organisation collected Danish grants.
The imams sought the assistance of Muslim countries'
ambassadors, but prime minister Rasmussen refused to meet
the diplomats because he had "no power whatsoever to limit
the press". The imams decided to internationalize the issue.[19]
Helped by the ambassadors, Laban put together two
delegations to Muslim countries
(3-11.12.2005 and 17-31.12.2005). Akkari
and Laban prepared a dossier
for the delegations. It contained the cartoons and lied that
Muslims didn’t have the right to build mosques and were
subjected to racism. Arab media interviewed some of the
imams, who reiterated their lies and claimed that the Danish
government was planning to censor the Koran.[21]
The delegation to Egypt (3-11.12.2005) met the general
secretary of the Arab League, Egypt's grand mufti, the sheik
of Cairo's Al-Azhar university and an advisor to Egypt's
foreign minister. The meeting was arranged by Egypt's
ambassador to Denmark, Mona Omar Attia, whom the Danish
foreign ministry later removed from her Copenhagen post for
alleging that Islam wasn't officially recognized in Denmark.[22]
After the meeting the Egyptian press alleged Danish
sacrileges: press campaign against Islam, plans for a
state-censored version of the Koran, a film "to show how
horrible Islam is", and not 12 but 120 cartoons. JP
(1.1.2006) called this "absurd diplomacy". Hadi Kahn,
chairman of the Organization of Pakistani Students in
Denmark, assured that the Danish imams didn't represent all
Muslims in Denmark.
Rasmussen was shocked: "those people, whom we have given the
right to live in Denmark and where they freely have chosen
to stay, are now touring Arab countries and inciting
antipathy towards Denmark and the Danish people." The
government only asked Danish embassies to correct the
misinformation. Previously, Rasmussen had urged the imams to
do it themselves, but they pointed at the "international
press" as the source of the deception.
This indicated the imams' hostile attitude. The Danish
leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Muhammed Fouad al-Barazi
tearfully described on al Jazeera (31.1.2006) some Danish
plans to burn the Koran, causing worldwide outrage.[25]
On the same day, Laben who demanded an economic boycott of
his host country and lied in the dossier, expressed his
surprise that the worldwide uproar went so far.
Danish websites were hacked, and Islamists posted on-line
threats of attacks against the country.[26]
In December 2005, rumours circulated in the Arab world that
Danes would burn the Koran.[27]
As evidence, Wikipedia cites a report that SMS has
told people to buy and burn Koran at a demonstration on
4.2.2006.[28]
Indeed, some 40 right-wingers have demonstrated, but without
burning Koran.
Danes proved the imams' accusations of racism wrong; there
was not a single anti-Muslim attack in Denmark throughout
the crisis. A Syrian-born Danish parliamentarian, Naser
Khader had to do with it. This political science graduate
launched a political career on the integration issue, and
criticised the attitude of those Muslim immigrants who
refused to embrace Danish values. He aimed at uniting
moderate Danish Muslims in the Democratic Muslim Network,
which led to a dispute with Laban.[29]
In March 2006, French journalist Mohammed Sifaoui covertly
taped. Akkari's comment: "If [Khader] becomes minister
[...], wouldn't there be two guys sent over to blow up him
and his ministry?"[30]
Unknown as a jester, Akkari apologised for his "bad joke".
Khader questioned why the imams didn't go before a Danish
court, instead of travelling to Egypt. He outlined the
division of Salafists. Wahabbi Salafists, including
Al-Qaeda, espouse direct violence, whereas Muslim
Brotherhood Salafists are obliging to society, but covertly
spread their faith, educate and influence young people to
embrace their ideology.[31]
Akkari and Laban are Salafists in the Muslim Brotherhood.
Khader alluded to double-tongue of the Salafists, which
allows them to lie for their cause.
Muslims were afraid to support Khader openly, as some
supporters have received threats and others feared the
radical imams' label of being anti-Islam. After the cartoon
affair, Hlayhel embarked on the construction of a large new
mosque inside "the ghetto", a project he had previously
opposed. Attracted by Hlayhel's new notoriety, Saudi
businessmen have funded the construction. Moderate Muslim
organisations receive city funding, attracting accusations
of being government puppets.
The bomb explodes
The imams added to the dossier three, obscene images that
had never been published (except for an image from a pig
squelling competition in France
that wasn't related to Islam), thus
out-blaspheming the Danes.
The dossier included unfunny clippings from the satire page
of WeekendAvisen. Not one depicted the Prophet. An abstract
drawing, captioned "Mother with prophet" after an old Danish
joke that if one can't figure out an abstract painting it is
"Mother with child", stirred controversy:
"The imams have reproduced this cartoon and distributed it
all over the Middle East to ensure that 1.3 billion Muslims
would get sufficiently offended – except that their
translation is wrong. The Arabic caption reads "make fun,
amuse yourself and play with the prophet"."
According to the dossier,
WeekendAvisen
"brought
images that were more powerful and
worse" than JP's.
Several newspapers repeated this
blunder, citing Kasem Ahmad, a
spokesman for the Danish
Islamic Society. Another
leading imam, Fativ Alev, didn't
mind the WeekendAvisen
satire.
Western media hasn't presented the variety of perceptions,
giving an impression of a uniform, radical Islamic bloc.
A major Egyptian Muslim paper El Fagr had published seven of
the twelve cartoons during Ramadan (17.10.2005), as a
"continuing insult" and a "racist bomb".
No outrage has erupted.
When the Muslim riots started four months after JP
publication, it was a different game. Jordanian Al-Shihan
(2.2.2006) published the drawings and the editor was sacked
and ordered to apologise. Earlier, Swedish (7.1.2006) and
Norwegian (10.1.2006) press had re-published the touchy
cartoons. In a letter to their ambassadors in the Middle
East, the Norwegian ministry of foreign affairs regretted
Magazinet's disrespectful action but re-asserted freedom of
speech. By the beginning of February 2006, it was an all-out
media war without regrets. The spiteful
re-publication of the cartoons swept European press,
escalating the riots and threats, and hardening up the
Western public.
Several Islamic states condemned the cartoons, severed
diplomatic relations with Denmark and threatened to cut off
oil supply. Muslim consumers began boycotts of Danish
products. Islamists in several regions prompted
Scandinavians to leave, stormed EU offices, called for
terror against Nordic targets including troops in
Afghanistan and Iraq, and demanded that Denmark punish JP
and the cartoonists. Muslims in Western countries
demonstrated, while in the Islamic world they stormed and
torched Western, Israeli and Chilean diplomatic posts, and
desecrated their flags. Desecrating Swiss, British and
Scandinavian flags could be anti-Christian, as they
incorporate a cross.
On the eve of the re-publication, Clinton and Putin
(31.1.2006) condemned the original publication and the
unrestrained freedom of speech rationale. Numerous Western
governments (including the USA), the Russian Orthodox
Church, the Mufiat in Russia (1.2.2006), and the Chechen
leader Basayev (31.2.2006) disapproved of the
re-publication. Vatican stated (5.2.2006): "The right to
freedom of thought and expression [...] cannot imply the
right to offend the religious sentiment of believers [...]
violent actions of protest are equally deplorable."[39]
The Conference of European Rabbis stated (5.2.2006) the
publications of the cartoons "humiliate and disparage the
feelings of Muslims", and compared them to anti-Semitic
caricatures.[40]
The European Parliament condemned (16.2.2006) all violence
related to the cartoons, and expressed solidarity with all
affected countries. It asserted the freedom of speech and
Muslims' right to protest peacefully.
Shortly after torching of the Danish embassy (4.2.2006),
Syria's grand mufti said that out of 10,000 demonstrators in
Damascus, only 10-15 were responsible for the torching.
Hoping to restore the relationship with Denmark "as soon as
possible", he promised to rebuild the embassy and gave the
Danish people a gold plate with Koran citations when Danish
TV 2 visited him. Syria officially apologised for not
protecting the embassy well enough,[41]
yet Condi Rice charged the Syrian government for instigating
the riots.
Media and freedom of speech
BBC out-performed the European re-publications. On BBC TV
(1.2.2006), Danish imam Abu Bashar showed the three false
drawings to Arabic League representatives. The voice-over
added that JP had apologized for these drawings – a lie
suggestive that JP had published the three images. After a
lengthy discussion on a blog, BBC wrote (6.2.2006) in an
obscure place of their website: "The BBC was caught out and
for a time showed film of this in Gaza without realizing it
was not one of the 12."
BBC posting (7.2.2007) still didn't make the "mistake" good.
Mainstream media became accomplices by not clarifying BBC "mistake",[44]
but reported that the three cartoons were examples of hate
mail that some Danish Muslims had received in internet
discussions on the twelve cartoons. The imams refused to
divulge the identities of the Muslims recipient of the hate
emails, making it impossible to identify the senders. The
lettering on one of the three cartoons suggested that the
original language of the author might not use the Roman
alphabet.
Showing the BBC footage in Gaza was incidentary, as the most
militant events of the upheaval were taking place there.
Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement gave Danes, Norwegians,
and Swedes 48 hours, and Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades gaves
Danes and Swedes 72 hours to leave the Gaza Strip
(29.1.2006). Next day, the Al-Aqsa stormed the EU office in
Gaza and threatened to kidnap the workers unless the EU
officially apologized for the cartoons.
A "moratorium" to publish the cartoons made it difficult for
the US public to form opinions. World's
largest news broker, AP
suppressed the cartoons. With the
exception of Fox News, networks
haven't aired them,
joining the leading papers in the
blackout. Californian Daily Press
editor, Don Holland objected:
""
Michelle Malkin "observed a seeming double-standard with the
Muhammad cartoons compared to the photos of U.S. soldiers
harshly handling prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq"
– photos that had shocked Muslims and Christians alike.
NYT covered
[48] the crisis with a delay,
repeating the mantra of Islamophobic Danes vs. Denmark's
200,000 Muslims radicalised by anti-immigrant sentiments.
From Miami, his hideout from death threats,
Flemming Rose, JP editor responsible for publishing the
cartoons, said:
"freedom of speech, even if it was a provocation, that does
not make our right to do it any less legitimate before the
law". NYT quoted Laban, "a leader among Denmark's Muslims",
who believed the cartoons had been calculated to incite. NYT
emphasized the radicalization: "Danish counterterrorism
officials say more young Danish Muslims are being drawn to
Hizb ut-Tahrir [...] which seeks the unification of all
Muslim countries under one leader and Shariah, the Islamic
legal code. The group [...] is banned in most of the Muslim
world, as well as in Russia and Germany [...] The State
Prosecutor's Office investigated the group in spring 2004
and decided not to ban it because it had not broken the
law."
Hizb ut-Tahrir made headlines during the cartoon debate when
Laban's son, Taim, radicalized after recruitment by Hizb
ut-Tahrir, was expelled from school for calling for the
destruction of Israel and assailing Danish democracy,
reported NYT. The imam said he opposed Taim's sermons and
had told his defiant son to leave the house, but criticized
the outcome of Tim's behaviour – a committee of mostly
Christian rectors banned Friday Prayer at public schools.
Taim's school head said his Friday prayer sermons would
raise tensions among the school's moderate Muslims.
According to the public prosecutor (6.1.2006), JP's cartoon
publication wasn't an offence under the Danish Criminal
Code, neither under section 140 (publicly ridiculing or
insulting dogmas of worship of any lawfully existing
religious community in Denmark) nor section 266b
(dissemination of information by which a group of people are
threatened, insulted or degraded on account of their
religion).[49]
The Director of Public Prosecution decided[50]
on appeals: "The religious writings of Islam cannot be said
to contain a general and absolute prohibition against
drawing the Prophet Muhammed [...] The drawings in question
[...] are not [...] merely a depiction of the Prophet
Muhammed, but a caricature of him."
On the "bomb-in-the-turban" caricature, the director ruled
that it expressed "criticism of Islamic groups who commit
terrorist acts in the name of religion [...W]hile
propagating their religion, [the Prophet] and his followers
were involved in violent conflicts and armed clashes with
persons and population groups that did not join Islam, and
that both many Muslims and others lost their lives
[thereby...] Prophet Muhammed as a violent person must be
considered an incorrect depiction if it is with a bomb as a
weapon [...but] may with good reason be understood as an
affront and insult to the Prophet [...] However, such a
depiction is not an expression of mockery or ridicule, and
hardly scorn within the meaning of section 140 of the Danish
Criminal Code."
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
protects freedom of expression, including "expressions that
may shock, offend or disturb", "subject to restrictions and
penalties as prescribed by law and which are [...]
proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued." The director
concluded that the European Court of Human Rights "leaves a
wider margin of appreciation to the individual State,
because in this area the national authorities also act to
safeguard freedom of religion, another fundamental principle
of the Convention [...P]ersons who exercise the freedom to
manifest their religion [...] must tolerate and accept the
denial by others of their religious beliefs and even the
propagation by others of doctrines hostile to their faith."
The director was unable to infer "a certain state of law
regarding how the Court would weigh the regard for freedom
of expression in relation to expressions that can offend
religious feelings."
Rose wrote in the JP article accompanying the 12 cartoons:
"Some Muslims reject modern, secular society. They demand a
special position, insisting on special consideration of
their own religious feelings. It is incompatible with
secular democracy and freedom of expression, where [one] has
to be ready to put up with scorn, mockery and ridicule."[51]
The director noted that Rose' statement conflicted with the
limits on the freedom of expression.
The Danish government strove at a dialogue with the local
Muslims, and responded to a 24.11.2005 letter of the UN
Special Rapporteurs that it was "focusing strongly on
ensuring a society with mutual respect and shared democratic
values." Rasmussen (1.1.2006) had condemned "any expression,
action or indication that attempts to demonise groups of
people on the basis of their religion or ethnic background".
He pointed out that "the general situation in Denmark" had
been "much more quiet and peaceful than in many other
countries". He qualified the use of humour and satire as a
freedom-of-speech approach to authorities, without intention
to incite to hatred or cause community fragmentation. The
minister of foreign affairs warned against disrespect of
religions (4.1.2006): "The objective is not to blame through
intolerance all Muslims for supporting al-Qaeda, but [...]
to contribute to the development and reform that the Muslim
world is actually engaged in".[52]
Already on 19.12.2005, former Danish ambassadors criticized
Danish prime minister Rasmussen's refusal to meet
ambassadors of Muslim states, which might indicate
Rasmussen's unilateral action against Danish state
interests. The Council of Europe criticized the Danish
government for inaction under the "freedom of speech"
rationale. The Arab League followed (29.12.2005) in the
steps of concerns from the OIC summit (6.12.2005), and from
the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (7.12.2005). The
OIC stated (28.1.2006) that the Danish government should had
condemned the cartoons immediately. JP apologized
(30.1.2006) for offending the Muslims (rather than for the
publication), but al Jazeera didn't translate it in an
interview with Rose (31.1.2006).
Zionist agenda
Wikipedia proposes
that the West has used the controversy "to show Muslims and
Islam in a bad light, thus influencing public opinion in the
West in aid of various political projects, for example, to
support further military intervention in the Middle East".
Wikipedia, like the Islamists, don't distinguish the media
from the Western public that has been largely opposing the
wars in Iraq and Palestine. It does not clarify, either,
that "Western" involvement in the Middle East is a Zionist
imposition. Justin Raimondo, whom Wikipedia cites as
reference for the "Western" agenda,
points at "U.S. neoconservatives". Congressman Ron Paul
described the neocons: "They unconditionally support Israel
and have a close alliance with the [Israeli] Likud Party."
Professor Kevin MacDonald
found the neocons "a complex interlocking professional and
family network centered around Jewish publicists and
organizers flexibly deployed to recruit the sympathies of
both Jews and non-Jews in harnessing the wealth and power of
the United States in the service of Israel [...] a
semicovert branch of the massive and highly effective
pro-Israel lobby". To broaden the base, the neocons
manipulate US Judeo-Christians (the Christian Right or
Christian Zionists) who believe in Israel as a sign of
Jesus's "second coming". The neocons can thus pose as
"Western".
Raimondo found links with the neocons in Rose's biography on
Wikipedia, but the present version lacks it. According to
Raimondo, Rose "authored an entirely uncritical profile"
published in JP, of neocon Daniel Pipes, "the controversial
anti-Arabist" appointed by Bush to the US Institute of
Peace. Pipes had founded Campus Watch, an organisation
"fanatically hostile to Islam, Arabs" and any opponent of
his extreme Israeli nationalism. Pipes compiles blacklists
of professors who "refuse to spout the pro-Israel party
line, and encourages students "to spy on their teachers and
report miscreants". Rose has mentioned none of this in his
essay on Pipe's view of "militant Islam" as a Communist- and
fascist-like threat. Raimondo charged that the publication
of the twelve cartoons was to "mold mass attitudes and whip
up entire populations into a state of hysteria […] the hate
propaganda emanating from certain quarters in Europe and the
U.S. amounts to preparations for war".
Concurrently with Raimondo, but ignored by Wikipedia,
Christopher Bollyn (American Free Press) postulated that the
Zionists try to drive a "clash of civilizations" wedge
between the West and the Muslim world.[57]
Bollyn asked Rose and JP editors: "would you publish
cartoons making fun of the Jewish Holocaust? [...] do you at
least support the right of newspapers and individuals to
raise historical questions about the Holocaust?" Bollyn
didn't get an answer and concluded: "The fact that the
editors behind the anti-Islamic images claim to be
exercising free speech while refusing to address Europe's
strict censorship laws regarding discussion of the Holocaust
and the ongoing imprisonment of historical revisionists
reveals the existence of a more sinister agenda behind the
provocative cartoons." He cited University of Copenhagen
professor Mikael Rothstein who told BBC that "agents of
certain persuasion" were behind the anti-Muslim provocation.
To Bollyn, Rose was the key "agent", tied to the neocons
behind WOT.
International Herald Tribune (1.1.2006) noted that Rose's
liberalism bypassed Zionist leaders and their crimes, as
Rose said "he would not publish a cartoon of Israel's Ariel
Sharon strangling a Palestinian baby, since that could be
construed as 'racist.'" Bollyn remarked that Rose penned the
essay about Pipes ("the neocon ideologue who says the only
path to Middle East peace will come through a total Israeli
military victory") after visiting him in October 2004, in
the wake of Pipe's nomination (April 2003) by president Bush
to the board of the United States Institute of Peace, a
congressionally sponsored think tank dedicated to "the
peaceful resolution of international conflicts".
Bollyn observed that the February 2006, re-publication of
the cartoons accross Europe must have been "coordinated by a
hidden hand". Against condemnations from leading political
and religious organizations world-wide, Robert Ménard,
secretary general of Reporters without Borders, a
Paris-based media monitor, supported the 2006
re-publication. However, Bollyn argued, media monitors like
Ménard accept without question the government-imposed
censorship laws and imprisonment of Holocaust revisionists:
"At least 4 well known historians are currently in prison in
Germany and Austria for writing and speaking about the
Holocaust." During "the last decade, there have been several
thousand people fined and hundreds put in European prisons
for having written or spoken about the Holocaust or Jewish
related affairs in a manner deemed illegal".
Bollyn alleged foul play: "The hard-line position taken by
Rasmussen", a WOT ally, "has more to do with advancing the
"clash of civilizations" than defending free speech in
Europe". Bollyn elaborated: "Rasmussen [...a] frequent
Bilderberg attendee [...] has refused to issue a formal
apology, which would cost Denmark nothing but could save the
nation from further losses to its exporting business and
national prestige [...] Danish lives are also clearly
endangered. Rasmussen's refusal to apologize, however,
suggests that the "calculated offense," which has led to
increased tension between Europeans and the Muslim world,
was intentional." Acording to Bollyn, Merete Eldrup, the
managing director of the parent company that owns JP, is
married to Anders Eldrup, chairman of Danish Oil and Natural
Gas and a Bilderberg attendee.
CNN chose Pipes to explain the cause of angry Muslim
reaction to the cartoons. Pipes blamed radical imams,
instead of Rose, for circulation of the offensive pictures:
"extremists" had used the offensive cartoons "to rally their
people and become more agitatedly anti‑Western".
Although violent protests erupted in too many Islamic
countries, US secretary of state Rice blamed only Syria and
Iran, coincidentally the next targets of Israel's WOT.
Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni concurred with Rice. As
violence raged, Pipes' article Cartoons and Islamic
Imperialism shaped public opinion: "Westerners will either
retain their civilization, including the right to insult and
blaspheme, or not." Bollyn concluded: "Framing the cartoon
scandal in this way and forcing a false choice between
defending the "free press" or the Muslim protesters, Pipes
reveals his hidden hand behind the publication of the
cartoons, which now appears to be a well‑laid
trap into which a number of newspapers and populist parties
have fallen."
From Russia with hate
Yury Samodurov, "a well known human rights activist", said
on Russian TV (2.2.2006) that, in the name of freedom of
expression, his Sakharov Museum would show the cartoons, and
Satanic Verses would be illustrated with them.[58]
He had been convicted for organizing an art show, in which
participants had used items of the Orthodox Christian
religion only, to incite religious strife in Russia. A
supporter of the cartoon exhibition, lawyer Yury Shmidt had
invited "a prominent figure of French liberalism Andre
Glucksmann and a notorious writer Michel Houellebecq (the
author of the controversial novel The Elementary Particles)"
to lecture on Islamic fundamentalism at the opening. They
were the initiators of a Russian re-publication of Satanic
Verses. Russian Muslim and Orthodox clergy stopped a 1998
publication of Rushdie's novel. Sponsors of the Sakharov
museum include billioner Boris Berezovsky, media baron
Vadimir Gusinsky, the Soros Fund, John and Catherine
McArthur Foundation and Henry Jackson Foundation. Glucksmann
and Houellebecq were to write comments for the cartoon
exhibition catalogue for Russia-wide distribution.
The above VIPs have questionable record, like George Soros
and his foundations and NGOs have. A reviewer wrote that if
Houellebecq's book was "representative of 21st century
literature, I'm glad I won't be around to read the books
printed in the 22nd century."[59]
With other Jewish French philosophers Gluksman developed
"the right of humanitarian intervention" for US-NATO
interventionism in the Balkan wars.[60]
Russians constitute 86% majority in their country, and there
are only 1% Jews. Yet, Jewish oligarchs control the media,
way over a percent of ministers are Jews, and extreme Jews
disseminate hate literature, while Russians can't even talk
about the predominance of Jews among the Bolsheviks who have
destroyed the Russian Orthodox culture along with millions
murdered in the Jewish-run Gulag.
A petition of 5000 Russian intellectuals[61]
described how Jewish oligarchs acquired 50% of that nation's
assets. The first chairman of the Russian Jewish Congress.
Gusinsky listed the reasons for the "Jewish luck":
"toughness," "fewer rules, more rules of force, more rules
of aggression". Gusinsky, while heading the RJC, was accused
of financial crimes, after which he disappeared with the
stolen moneys to Israel. His successor Nevzlin went into
hiding to Israel, after he was accused of complicity in
murder of his competitors. "And these people were chosen by
the Jewry to be their leaders, while the international Jewry
protected them from a trial in every way by crying about
"state anti-Semitism!"" For the first time since Jews had
settled in Russia a millenium ago, "we obtained real power
in this country", stated Jewish journalist Topol, in Open
letter to Berezovsky, Gusinsky, Smolensky, Khodorkovsky and
other oligarchs. Topol and other sensitive Jews underscore
the fact that "destructive and selfish polity of Jewish
oligarchs, humiliating the Russian people, provokes
animosity of the Russian people to the Jews", contended the
Russian petition.
According to Institute of the Middle East president Yevgeny
Satanovsky, the cartoons had stirred the countries under the
strongest influence of Iran: "the apex of the conflict
coincided precisely with the discussion of the Iranian
nuclear dossier at the IAEA". Scientific Council of the
Moscow Carnegie Centre member, Alexei Malashenko proposed
that the cartoon uproar had provided a pretext for showing
Muslim coherencet when "the Muslim world has no concerted
position either on the Iranian nuclear program or Hamas,
whose ideology is opposed by moderate Islamic regimes".[62]
Considering that the US administration has finally admitted
lack of proof of Iran's nuclear military capability and
Hamas is Mossad-manipulated, the insinuations are
pro-Israeli. The Russian petition confirmed a pro-Israeli
agenda of Satanovsky's institute. RJC had announced it
"conducts acts of solidarity with the people of Israel and
political lobbying of Israel's interests" [...] This goal is
also being pursued by the State Institute for Israel and
Near-East Studies", whose leader, Satanovsky, headed the
RJC.[63]
Perhaps sensing Jewish elites' anti-social agenda, Iranian
Hamshahri announced (6.2.2006) a competition for Holocaust
cartoons to "test out how committed Europeans were to the
concept freedom of expression". Iran's president Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad had criticised European hypocrisy: "If your
newspapers are free why do not they publish anything about
the innocence of the Palestinians and protest against the
crimes committed by the Zionists?"[64]
Rose told CNN: "My newspaper is trying to establish a
contact with [Hamshahri], and we would run the cartoons the
same day as they publish them". JP's editor-in-chief refused
to publish the Holocaust cartoons. Hamshahri launched the
competition (13.2.2006), and the next day an Israeli artist
Amitai Sandy started an anti-Semitic cartoon contest to be
drawn by Jews: "No Iranian will beat us on our home turf!"
The Israeli challenge looked more like mocking of the
Iranian cartoon initiative.
Agenda implemented
Wikipedia placed Raimondo's article under "Western" agenda
instead of "Alleged Zionist agenda", where only Ayatollah
Khamenei's blame on "Zionist conspiracy", and a Palestinian
envoy's to Washington allegations against the Israeli Likud
party for the publication and distribution of the cartoons,
found place. As "Islamist or Middle East regime agendas",
Wikipedia listed unsuccessful widening of "the split between
the USA and Europe" by Islamists "jockeying for influence
both in Europe and the Islamic [World]". Middle Eastern
regimes "have been accused of taking advantage of the
controversy, and adding to it, in order to demonstrate their
Islamic credentials, distracting from their failures by
setting up an external enemy", with the cartoons "as a way
of showing that the expansion of freedom and democracy in
their countries would lead inevitably to the denigration of
Islam."" In their efforts to falsify facts, Wikipedia
purveys Zionist propaganda, and gives clues to the design
behind the cartoon provocation.
Naming JP, Denmark, the Islamic Society in Denmark and the
Muslim world as the primary parties, Wikipedia failed to
refer to James Petras and Robin Eastman-Abaya (P&EA).
P&EA explained why, "after the bombing of Baghdad, the
tortures of Abu Ghariab, the massacres in Fallujah and the
utter destitution of the entire Iraqi and Afghan
people…would Moslems turn their anger at symbols of
Denmark". Apologists of the US Israel Lobby charge critics
that not the Lobby but the Big Biz drives US imperialism.
P&E submitted: "There is no evidence that
the major US oil corporations pressured Congress or promoted
the war in Iraq or the current confrontation with Iran.
There is plenty of evidence that they are very uneasy about
the losses that may result from an Israeli attack on Iran."
Another author argued: "The Big Corporations would be far,
far better off if the US switched sides completely, and
supported the Palestinians to the hilt [...] Israel does not
[...] help the US control the oil."[66]
Given the failures of Middle East policies, and global
resistance to a preemptive attack on Iran for its
non-existent nuclear weapons, Israel needed a "clash of
civilizations" campaign to justify attacks on Iran and
Syria. Hamas' electoral victory, hopeless war in Iraq after
the WMD hoax was exposed, Iran's defiance, Bush's loss of
public support for pro-Israeli policies, and criminal
investigation of AIPAC, Israel's main political tool in the
US, have jeopardized Israel's strategy of having America
fight its wars. AP&EA postulated that the post-9/11 tensions
needed revival to Israel's advantage; "hence the 'Flemming
Rose' provocation [...] the coordinated, wide promotion of
the act [...] the free speech agitation [...] the
predictable explosion of protest [...] the 'recreation' of
Mid-East tension…and the advances of Israel's agenda."
According to P&EA, the clash would originate in Denmark, an
ally in the invasion and destruction of Iraq and
Afghanistan, whose "national intelligence apparatus would be
eager to serve Israel's interest". P&EA cite former Mossad
agent Victor Ostrovsky's book By Way of Deception (St.
Martin's Press, 1990): "The relationship between the Mossad
and Danish intelligence is so intimate as to be indecent." A
Mossad agent monitors "all Arabic and Palestinian-related
messages" among Denmark's Arab community coming into the
Danish Civil Security Service headquarters, "an
extraordinary arrangement for a foreign intelligence
service". For their servility, every three years Danish
intelligence officials go to Israel for a Mossad seminar
which generates useful contacts "while perpetuating the
notion that no organization deals with terrorism better than
[Mossad]."
Officially, Rose challenged the growing "political
correctness" of restraints in criticism of Islam and
Muslims. His staff illustrated some of the twelve cartoons,
including the bomb-in-the-turban one. Subsequently, Mossad
attempted to "further heighten East-West tension": Rose
"publicly offered to publish any Iranian cartoons which
would mock the Holocaust in 'his' paper. The senior editor
of JP, apparently belatedly caught on to 'Flemming Rose'
hidden agenda and vetoed the 'offer' and asked Rose to take
a leave of absence". JP has published the cartoons as
Israeli and US Zionists have escalated the war propaganda
against Iran, P&EA believe. Allegedly, Danish intelligence
has advised Rasmussen "not to give way by refusing to
apologize" on demand of the pro-Western Arab regimes, and
"even refusing a request for a meeting with a group of
Denmark-based diplomats from Arab and Moslem countries".
According to P&EA, by early January 2006, after the Danish
imams' travels, Mossad activated sayanim (volunteer Jewish
collaborators outside of Israel) throughout European media
to re-publish on 1-2.2.2006: "Almost all the Western media
condemned the initial moderate Muslim protests and rapidly
provoked the subsequent massive escalation, doubtlessly
aided by covert Mossad operatives among Arab populations."
Thus P&EA has answered Raimondo's bewilderment about the
coincidence.[67]
On top of it,
A&V reveal that the Danish security and intelligence
service, PET has been exploiting the imams' radicalism.
PET has known the imams' goals and activities, but for fear
of "alienating them", still engages with the radical imams
and "sometimes praises them" for things like calming down
the Muslim community during the cartoon crisis. PET's
treatment elevates the imams' status as the Muslim
community's defenders: "the imams manipulate the
relationship, becoming necessary mediators in any contact
between authorities and the Muslim community […] If keeping
order within the Muslim community is subcontracted to the
imams, the state relinquishes part of its authority on its
own soil to the benefit of megalomaniacal imams disloyal to
Denmark and its democracy."[68]
A&V cite "other reasons to be sceptical about PET's benign
attitude". Hlayhel's sermon in the aftermath of the cartoon
affair had classed Danish society: good (PET and Arla – the
Aarhus food company that condemned the cartoons fearing
economic sanctions) and bad (JP, Danish government, and
People's Party). To Hlayhel, PET and Arla were good "tribes"
with whom a revocable covenant could be made. The Prophet
formed similar alliances with adversaries.
Judeocentric power
Wikipedia's "Western" and "Islamic" agendas would fit
Zionist goals of antagonizing the Western and Islamic
worlds, and weakenimg each of them from within. The power of
Jewish identity and its terror are observable in the
activities of the "Zionist Power Configuration" (ZPC)
that includes the US neoconservatives
and penetrates key power centres. It comprises "interrelated
formal and informal groupings, operating at the
international, national, regional, and local levels". ZPC
suppresses any unsupportive or critical media reporting on
Israel, and can finish careers of dissident politicians,
while journalists and academics are banished for stepping
out of line. This way, US supports Israel's goals of Middle
East hegemony, including its wars, colonization and
oppression. No other US lobby including Big Business and
Irish separatists, has ever comparably influenced US
politics. The ZPC has created a "tyranny of Israel over the
US" with consequences grave enough to threaten world peace
and stability, the global economy, and the very future of
democracy."
Some observers have noted that the super secret National
Security Agency (NSA) risks infiltration by the Lobby: "with
pro-Israeli neocons now engrained within the CIA, Defense
Intelligence Agency, State Department, and National Security
Council, NSA is ripe for penetration by Israeli
intelligence. With outside contractors now permeating NSA
and a major Israeli espionage operation being discovered
inside the Pentagon, once again there is a fear within NSA
that foreign intelligence services such as the Mossad could
make another attempt to penetrate [NSA]."[71]
US public dissent against pro-Israeli Middle East policy,
and against decline of democracy and civil liberties, has
weakened the support by Christian Zionists who begin to
realize that the neocons have manipulated Christian
sectarian belief in the Second Coming of Christ.
Universalism (advocating loyalty to and concern for others
without regard to national or other allegiances)[72]
has contributed to social and political change that
marginalizes Christian values. A British case,[73]
similar to older ones in Sweden, underscores a problem with
Islamic immigration, ostensibly the root of the cartoon
controversy:
"Islamic extremists have created "no-go" areas across
Britain where it is too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter
[...A]ttempts are being made to give Britain an increasingly
Islamic character by introducing the call to prayer and
wider use of sharia law, a legal system based on the Koran.
In an attack on the Government's response to immigration and
the influx of "people of other faiths to these shores",
[Pakistani-born bishop Nazir-Ali] blames its "novel
philosophy of multiculturalism" for allowing society to
become deeply divided, and accuses ministers of lacking a
"moral and spiritual vision"."
Islamist in-roads rely on influx, terror and demographic
conquest (e.g. Serbian Kosovo, Christian Middle East).
Without immigration and multi-cultural incubation, Islamists
wouldn't thrive in the West. A University of California
psychology professor Kevin MacDonald posits that
universalist movements, established and led to advance
Jewish particularism, have harmed Western societies,[74]
causing anti-Semitism.[75]
20th century universalist intellectual warfare has embraced
Marxism (and its derivatives Bolshevism and Communism),
Freudian psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt school of sociology,
Franz Boas's school of anthropology, multi-culturalism and
Third World immigration, with social and cultural diversity
as a common thread. MacDonald's The Culture of Critique
charges dishonesty of the Jewish intellectual movements;
while dissolving the ethnic identification of gentiles via
universalism, "Jews have maintained precisely the kind of
intense group solidarity they decry as immoral in others":
patriotism, racial loyalty, social structures and Christian
morality, including sexual restraint.[76]
MacDonald's thesis explains why in less than half a century
Western whites as a race have become apologetic, ashamed and
unsure of their history and of their claim to ancestral
lands –"there has been something more than natural change."
By not emulating the Judeocentric model, Europeans
throughout the Western world "place themselves in a position
of enormous vulnerability in which their destinies will be
determined by other peoples, many of whom hold deep
historically conditioned hatreds toward them. Europeans'
promotion of their own displacement is the ultimate
foolishness—an historical mistake of catastrophic
proportions."[77]
A Russian Jew, who became University of California at
Berkeley professor of history, Yuri Slezkine observed that
the most important factor in the 20th century history had
been the rise of the Jews in the West and the Middle East,
and their rise and decline in Russia.[78]
MacDonald added: "Jews not only became an elite in all these
areas, they became a hostile elite—hostile to the
traditional people and cultures of all three areas they came
to dominate."[79]
The idea warfare has led to horrendous consequences to
gentile and Jew. Judeocentric ideas of Bolshevism and
Communism, implemented largely by the most extreme of Jews
who have orchestrated the Soviet regime and dominated its
terror apparatus,[80]
have eclipsed the Nazi genocide of Slavs, Jews and more than
twenty other groups. The top Nazis were Jewish.[81]
They were aided by the banker Jewry,[82]
a repetition of aiding Bolsheviks,[83]
most of whom were extreme Jews.[84]
Zionist elites colaborated with the Nazis,[85]
and colluded in extermination of millions of Jews unwanted
in Palestine.[86]
Post-modern warfare, too, utilizes ideas (humanitarian
intervention, WOT, regions in place of nation-states)
together with infowar, military, diplomacy, economic
sanctions, and financial, legalistic (EU constitution,
international tribunals for former Yugoslavia and Rwanda)
and so-called non-governmental organization (NGO)
instruments, in order to subjugate sovereign nations. Jews
led immigration advocacy in the USA, England, France,
Australia and Canada, and strongly opposed Quebec
independence, according to MacDonald. The majority of
Boasians were "all Jews with strong Jewish identities" who
pursued "perceived Jewish interests, for example, cultural
pluralism as a model for Western societies". By 1926,
Boasians headed major US university anthropology
departments, providing intellectual support for open
immigration, integration, and racial cross-marriage. They
argued that the disadvantages of non-whites due to white
oppression could be eliminated by changing the racial
environment.
Jews have launched the desegregation movement. Boasian views
dominate US policy dogma that immigrants bring qualities
that whites lack. MacDonald quotes an American Jewish
Congress lawyer: "many of these [civil rights] laws were
actually written in the offices of Jewish agencies by Jewish
staff people, introduced by Jewish legislators and pressured
into being by Jewish voters." According to MacDonald, Jews
of every political faction favored high immigration, even
when they disagreed on other issues. The Boasians glorified
"ethnographies of idyllic [Third World] cultures that were
free of the negatively perceived traits that were attributed
to Western culture". The Boasians critiqued American culture
as "overly homogeneous, hypocritical, emotionally and
aesthetically repressive (especially with regard to
sexuality)".
French-Jewish deconstructionist Jacques Derrida later
supported the same idea of civilizational strife: "to
deconstruct the workings of strong nation-states with
powerful immigration policies […] the rhetoric of
nationalism, the politics of place, the metaphysics of
native land and native tongue [...] to disarm the bombs
[...] of identity that nation-states build to defend
themselves against the stranger, against Jews and Arabs and
immigrants". The Frankfurt School exalted nonconformist
lifestyle and sexuality that blossomed in the 1960s
countercultural revolution: "rebellion against parents,
low-investment sexual relationships, and scorn for upward
social mobility, social status, family pride, the Christian
religion, and patriotism."
While being silent on the Judeocentricity of immigration,
multi-culturalism and discourse control, a researcher notes
that the EU "Jihad-enabling traitor class" has made
"multiculturalism and effectively open-ended Third World
(overwhelmingly Muslim) immigration" into "two inviolable
Euro-dogmas". The dogmas are served to Europeans, in order
to "self-annihilate as people with a historical memory and a
cultural identity, and to make room for the monistic Utopia
spearheaded by the Jihadist fifth column". EU and its
"post-national subsidiaries" are unable to defend Europe
from Jihad: "Cynically defeatist, self-absorbed and
unaccountable to anyone but their own corrupt class, the
Eurocrats are just as bad as jihad’s fellow-travelers; they
are its active abettors and facilitators."[87]
Using Islamists
Denmark became a refuge for Islamists, for the strong
presence of Mossad and the co-operation with Danish security
and intelligence agencies that guaranteed effective control
of the militants in subversive and terrorist operations in
the West. The same infrastructure and expertise could have
been used in inciting the radical imams to action against
the cartoons internationally, leading to proliferation of
the conflict.
Since Mossad has had unrestricted access to surveillance of
Muslim radicals in Denmark, this theory is credible.
Manipulation of the radical imams with anonymous cartoons,
phone and email death threats, or SMS "from Danish
neo-Nazis" would be easy. Because of a
network of collaborators in the Muslim world, the delayed,
violent reactions of radical Muslims might have been
manipulated by Mossad, too.
Future imam Laban came to Denmark after expulsions from
Egypt and Kuwait for activities in the Muslim Brotherhood.
He "became the right-hand man of Abu Talal al-Qassimy, a top
leader of the Egyptian terrorist group Gama'a Islamiya who
had received asylum in Denmark after fighting in Afghanistan
alongside bin Laden and other future founders of Al-Qaeda.
Many other Gama'a members passed through Copenhagen,
including Al-Qaeda's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri." Laban
translated for and distributed a Gama'a magazine that
"glorified the killing of Western tourists in Egypt and
urged the annihilation of Jews in Israel".[88]
The leader of Gama'a, the "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdul-Rahman,
and nine others were convicted of planning the WTC 1993
bombings. In July 1990, he was able to travel to and from
the US, despite being on a watch list for three years. In
December 1990, he left the US again to attend an Islamic
conference in Copenhagen. He returned nine days later,
despite not having a US visa. In 1995, NYT commented that
the link between Abdul-Rahman and the CIA "is a tie that
remains muddy."[89]
Abdul-Rahman's Gama’a dominated a mosque of the Islamic
Cultural Institute in Milan, Italy. The mosque's imam, Anwar
Shaaban led mujahedin in Bosnia. Shaaban was a close friend
of Talaat Fouad Qassem, also a Gama’a leader and one of the
highest ranking leaders of the mujahedin in Bosnia, who
directed the flow of volunteers to Bosnia while on political
asylum in Denmark.[90]
In April 1994, seven Arabs living in Denmark, including
Qassem, were arrested. US prosecutors later claimed that
fingerprints on documents and videotapes seized from them
matched fingerprints on bomb manuals that Ahmad Ajaj was
carrying when he entered the US with Ramzi Yousef, both
alleged Palestinian perpetrators of the WTC 1993 bombing.
Despite evidence, no one was charged. Danish police later
said none of the seized documents indicated that the Arabs
personally took part in the attack. Ironically, two of them
got political asylum as members of Gama’a, a persecuted
group according to Danish law.[91]
The US government later called the Islamic Cultural
Institute Al-Qaeda’s main logistical base in Europe and some
evidence linked figures connected to it with 9/11.
Ajaj was arrested and allegedly masterminded the WTC bombing
from his prison cell. An Israeli paper reported that Ajaj
may have been a mole for Mossad, and Village Voice suggested
that Ajaj may have had "advance knowledge of the World Trade
Center bombing, which he shared with Mossad, and that
Mossad, for whatever reason, kept the secret to itself."[92]
In another episode, an Iraqi-born oil industry consultant
with strong ties to OPEC and Western oil industries,
interviewed potential successors to Saddam Hussein on behalf
of the Bush administration. Among others, he considered gen.
Nizar Khazrahi, who was under house arrest in Denmark
awaiting trial for war crimes.[93]
ZPC's use of Islamist militants has a history. The "father
of the Israeli State", David Ben-Gurion authored the July
1954, false-flag bombing attacks in Egypt that blamed
Egyptian Islamists, Muslim Brotherhood, in order to damage
Egypt-West relations.
In March 2005, Israel officially honoured the nine Egyptian
Jews involved in the bombings.[95]
Approval of Syria’s secular constitution in 1973 created a
backlash of violent Islamism. Beginning in 1976, the Muslim
Brotherhood carried out hundreds of attacks to bring down
the Syrian government with Israel’s and Jordan’s support. In
1982, the Syrian army massacred thousands of the Muslim
Brotherhood and supporters in the city of Hama, ending the
wave of violence.
In 1967, Israel took over the administration of the West
Bank and Gaza. Egyptian president Nasser had been tough on
Islamist militants, but Israel freed Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, an
Islamist jailed in Nasser’s 1965 crackdown. Former NYT
reporter David Shipler recounted the military governor of
the Gaza Strip gen. Yitzhak Segev tell him that Israeli
government had financed the Islamists to couter the PLO and
the Communists. In 1973-1978, Israeli military and Saudi
businessmen supported Yassin's Islamist organizations in the
West Bank and Gaza. The organizations controlled hundreds of
mosques, charities, and schools – recruiting centres for
militant Islamists. In 1978, Israeli government licensed one
of Yassin’s groups, the Islamic Association, over the
objections of moderate Palestinians.
In 1987, with Mossad’s support, Yassin formed Hamas as
Islamic Association’s military arm. According to Middle East
analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies, Anthony
Cordesman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Charles
Freeman, and an unnamed former senior CIA official, Israel
supported Hamas to counterbalance the PLO by using a
competing religious alternative. An unnamed US government
official added that the right-wing Israeli establishment
believed that "Hamas and the other groups, if they gained
control, would refuse to have anything to do with the peace
process and would torpedo any agreements". A state
department counterterrorism official, Larry Johnson stated:
"The Israelis are their own worst enemies when it comes to
fighting terrorism […] They do more to incite and sustain
terrorism than curb it."[96]
In a journal for Judaism and Zionism (Kivunim Feb. 1982),
Oded Yinon’s Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties
advocated exploitation of Arab states’ internal tensions
instead of striving for peace: "Lebanon’s total dissolution
into five provinces serves as a precedent for the entire
Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian
peninsula and is already following that track. The
dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or
religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s
primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while
the dissolution of the military power of those states serves
as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in
accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into
several states such as in present day Lebanon." This
strategy remains a core of Israels’ policy, the difference
since 1992 being that US-NATO would become part of it, and
nuclear weapons would be used.[97]
ZPC idea of using Muslim militants to further Zionism in
Palestine was applied to the USSR in 1977, when Carter’s
National Security advisor, geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski
formed the Nationalities Working Group (NWG). The father of
Daniel Pipes, Richard Pipes led NWG since 1981. He thought
that Soviet Muslims would "explode into genocidal fury", if
encouraged. According to Richard Cottam a former CIA
official and advisor to Carter administration, after the
fall of Iran’s Shah in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto
alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the
Republic of Iran."
First, the Islamists helped defeat the USSR, then they
replaced the Cold War threat of Communism with a new
propagandist target for continuing war and conquest. The
story of the US statesman, Robert Strausz-Hupe, illustrates
it.
Since 1957, Strausz-Hupe advocated New World Order (NWO)
against the USSR and "its" Communism
– actually a derivative of Judeocentric Marxism and
Bolshevism. A democratic world would follow the demise of
Communism, was the US willing to lead. Daniel Pipes, the
director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI), a
Strausz-Hupe’s creation, distributed a virulent version of
this concept in FPRI’s Orbis (December 1991), concurrently
with a classified report for the Director of US Nuclear
Targeting. "Communist threat" having tumbled with the Berlin
Wall, Pipes shifted to ''political emergence of the Asian
peoples'' and their acquisition of WMD. To make the
monstrous idea palatable to Westerners, Pipes coated it in
motherhood phrases (as Judeocentric guru, Leo Strauss had
taught): the NWO idea was needed ''to assure the survival of
Western culture and of mankind''. Extreme Jews had invented
Communism, an ostensible solution to the exploitation of
masses by "capitalists". Extreme Judeocentrists, too,
replaced Communism with NWO concept ostensibly to guard
humankind against "Asian" threats.
Strausz-Hupe, a valued member of the Council on Foreign
Relations, aimed at orchestrating global power by control of
elite thought, the seat of civilisation's power. Against his
condemnation of nationalism, he saw Jewish nationalism
(Zionism) and revived Islam (state-religion chauvinism) as
potential allies in building NWO. As Pipes' Orbis editorial
(Winter 1991-1992) stated, "the same forward strategy used
successfully against Moscow [may] now be used elsewhere",
closing the circle of far-seeing Judeocentric enablement of
Jihad. Consequently, US House speaker Newt Gingrich coined
"Islamic totalitarianism" (8.2.1995). Who controls public
discourse language, wins the war of ideas for policy
control. Totalitarianism was 20th century threat to Western
civilization. The Judeocentric control of the media had
assured that Bolshevik, Nazi and Communist totalitarianism
would be associated with Jews as victims, only.
Associating totalitarianism with Islam won minds for
escalating WOT to the ideological-strategic level of ZPC
conquests. The neocons and their German and British
colleagues were eagerly supporting Islamists in the Balkans,
proving Gingrich’s was merely a ZPC rhetoric.
Judeocentrists' "Islamic totalitarianism" has turned a
billion moderate Muslims into a global, inexorable and
mortal enemy, also within the European immigrants by
agitation of the radical elements. Operational doctrine and
military plans no longer needed any knowledge base, as phony
accusations of harbouring Al-Qaeda, WMD and nuclear
capability of Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan proved. A process
of self-fulfilling prophecy triggered a confrontational
spiral of chaos and hate – Judeocentrists’ favourite, in
Palestine and globally, from Bolshevik revolution to date.
Post-9/11 WOT implemented this "philosophy", while inventing
the evidence and maintaining the "Asian threat" and WMD
motive. Jihadist militancy supported by Western and Israeli
intelligence was exploited in each WOT case, and in the
Balkan conflicts.[100]
[101]
[102]
ZPC profited from arming the Islamists. In 1983, congressman
Charlie Wilson (Democrat) met with Zvi Rafiah and other
officials in Israel, then on behalf of the Israelis traveled
to Egypt and on to Pakistan where he secretly negotiated a
major weapons deal (including T-55 tanks) with Pakistan in
support of the Jihadists fighting Soviets. Between 1984 and
1989, Mossad’s Ari Ben Menashe ran an Israeli arms network,
supplying weapons to the Iranian Islamist regime for the
Iran-Iraq war. Menashe later wrote in Profits of War (1992)
that "no less than $160 million was funneled to Shamir’s
[Likud] faction" and the money also had helped finance
Mossad-controlled Palestinian terrorists "who would commit
crimes in the name of the Palestinian revolution but were
actually pulling them off, usually unwittingly, as part of
the Israeli propaganda machine". In 1992-1995, Wilson
continued to purvey Israeli weapons at secret meetings
between Israel and Pakistan arranged by Turkish ambassador
to Washington.[103]
Civilisations at war
The Frankfurt School and deconstructionists contradict
Polish scholar Feliks Koneczny (1862-1949) who has studied
civilisations according to eight pairs of opposites:
personalism vs. collectivism; family vs. clan; empirical vs.
theoretical solutions; historical consciousness vs. negation
of the past to demand uniformity; tolerance of diversity vs.
commanded uniformity; organic vs. planned organisations;
both private and public law vs. monism of either private or
public law; and, self-government vs. totalitarianism.
Koneczny focused on the Latin (Western), Jewish, Byzantine
and two Islamic (Arab and Turanian) civilisations. The
Islamic and Jewish civilisations are of interest to the
cartoon affair, since Koneczny found civilisations
confronted each other in "wars of ideas". To survive, a
civilisation must defend and promote itself through
education of the young. When a civilisation gives up its
identity and treats other civilisations as equals, the one
wins which is the most demanding of its members.
Against this empirical conclusion, Western (Latin
civilization) demagogues force mixed society through the
universalist policies. Samuel Huntington proposes in The
Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
(Simon and Schuster, 1996)
that conflict would most frequently and violently occur
because of cultural differences between major
civilisations. Unlike Koneczny, Huntington defines a
civilization by religion, language, ethnicity and race. He
posits that cultural differences between civilizations
result mainly from religion, giving rise to conflicts.
According to Huntington, not the state but culture is the
locus of wars. Since it could be used to explain WOT and the
occupation of Palestine, while absolving the responsibility
of a state, this concept would be attractive to the ZPC,
more so that the Jewish civilization is not in Huntington's
picture.
Huntington's work is inferior to Koneczny's in addressing
immigration and European integration. Out of these concerns,
a booklet[104]
by
professor Maciej Giertych, a
Polish member of the European Parliament, drew attention to
Koneczny. A watchdog labelled it anti-Semitic: "Giertych
describes the Jews as belonging to a civilization "of
programmed separateness, of programmed differentiation from
the surrounding communities... By their own will, they [the
Jews] prefer to live a separate life, in apartheid from the
surrounding communities... They form the ghettos
themselves." It was only Hitler's Germany that created the
concept of 'forced separation', he continued, claiming that
"Jews are not pioneers" but migrate from poorer communities
to settle among other civilizations "preferably among the
rich"."[105]
Jewish encyclopedias confirm that the separateness led to
expulsion of Jews in Europe, except from Poland where Jews
had found a haven, even though most of the Jewry had
separated themselves from other nationalities, still living
in enclaves in towns and villages of pre-WWII Poland.
Throughout their Polish history, the unassimilated Jews have
opposed Polish independence struggles – in unison with the
international Jewry. A recent analysis[106]
and critiques of the ZPC indicate a similar phenomenon in
the US: political apartheid of the American and Israeli
Jewry against US national interests.
The European Jewish Congress (EJC) reserved the right to
prosecute Giertych, the author "of this antisemitic text
which reeks of medieval hate and 19th century racial
stereotyping," and which "contains the same pre-war theories
that led to the Holocaust". By using the religious notion of
the "chosen nation" in politics, it is the Jews who became
racist, i.e. prejudiced, discriminatory, or antagonistic.
The Judeocentric hateful anti-Polonism in every existing
media form should be prosecuted rather than Koneczny's
messenger. Regarding EJC's slander on "pre-war theories",
theories lead nowhere, unless conceived on criminal demand
and implemented. The Balkan conflicts and the WOT have
exploited Huntington's theory, yet he is not blamed. The ZPC
has used his theory, from the PNAC blueprint for "wars
without end", to the Danish cartoons affair. Does Koneczny's
theory threaten the ZPC because it undermines universalism
and illuminates the perils of Judeocentrism? Should not the
ZPC focus on Jewish French philosophers who have advocated
the theory of humanitarian intervention for US-NATO wars?
Based on Koneczny, Giertych's brochure claimed:
"Integration, middle ground and the 'melting pot' are not
possible." The watchdog lamented that Giertych also
advocated Europe "should adhere to 'the Latin civilization,'
as opposed to Jewish, Islamic or other traditions." No fatwa
on Poland or Giertych has ensued. He has exercised his
parliamentarian freedom of speech, but, in contrast to the
cartoons affair, without infringing on the rights of others.
In descriptions of the Byzantine part of their culture
Germans could have found "medieval hate" ("When
religious wars ravaged Germany, in Poland we had a state
without witch-hunts and stakes") and "racial
stereotyping" ("Germans have a habit of calling those rulers
"great" who were successful [...but] unethical in their
political actions"; "the German intention of regulating
everything from above"), and German anti-racist laws could
have been harnessed, but they haven't.
German leader of the Socialist parliamentary group, Martin
Schulz called for an investigation into funding of
Giertych's booklet, because EU logo appeared on it (in
accord with procedures for claiming refund for MEP
activities). French socialist MEP Martine Roure have
disapproved of the booklet as contradicting EU values. The
European Commission spokesman said the EU executive "rejects
and condemns any manifestations of anti-Semitism, racism and
xenophobia". The European Parliament president Hans-Gert
Poettering was "deeply troubled" – no wonder, Giertych
advocated against European Union "values": "The
overregulation so prevalent in the European Union is
obviously of Byzantine and not of Latin origin [...] a
growing tendency in the European Union and also in many
countries traditionally of Latin civilisation, to accept the
Byzantine readiness to conduct politics without ethics.
Giertych addressed the promotion of Europe's adversaries,
the Judeocentric and Islamic-Turanian civilisations:
"A state never makes a nation [...] There will also never be
a European nation [...] It often happens in all Latin
civilisation countries that immigrants integrate and accept
the nationality of the adopted state as their own [...] In
the Turanian civilisation, nations in the European sense do
not form [...] Abandoning this desire [to act ethically,
responsibly and in conformity with what one believes to be
proper] in the field of politics is the main danger that
lies for the Latin civilisation in its contact with the
Byzantine one [...] Both our position and the Jewish
position make sense, but only within the context of our
respective civilisations [...] no middle ground is possible
on issues differentiating civilisations [...I]n dealing with
Islamic terrorism, it is important to distinguish Islamic
fanaticism born within the Turanian civilisation [...from]
the religious fidelity to the Koran present within the Arab
civilisation [...] The educational system must [...] hold
onto the principles of one civilisation. In most of Europe,
this should be the Latin civilisation".
While admitting his bias as Koneczny had done, Giertych was
far from being uncritical: "not everything promoted in the
third world by the West is worthy [...] we also tend to
export our own evils, such as wars or supplies for wars,
socialism and other materialistic ideologies, population
control, sexual promiscuity, family instability, hedonistic
life-styles". He was also clear about the education factor:
"We would be much more effective in promoting the Latin
civilisation if we would take care to protect it at home."
Even though democracy and freedom of speech momentarily lost
to anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia slanders, Giertych
focused on European values[107]
that he had allegedly violated. According to Poettering,
Giertych had committed a "serious breach of fundamental
rights, and in particular the dignity of human beings" and
the booklet contained "several allegations of a xenophobic
nature". Poettering officially reprimanded the Polish MEP,
on a rule that "Members' conduct shall be characterised by
mutual respect, be based on the values and principles laid
down in the basic texts on which the European Union is
founded". Poettering failed to substantiate, adding that
"the whole brochure, including its title, was interspersed
with allegations insulting and harming the value of human
dignity in general" and "it would be easy to cite examples
of what would be a long list of allegations of a xenophobic
nature" but failed to quote any.
Giertych noted: "It is noteworthy that the President did not
accuse me of racism or anti-Semitism of which I was accused
by the media, because my book does not supply any substance
to such accusations." Only two months earlier, European
Commission spokesman had stated that the EU executive
"rejects and condemns any manifestations of anti-Semitism,
racism and xenophobia" allegedly present in Giertych's
booklet. Giertych commented in the new booklet: "I have not
been told which particular values or principles I have
violated. In fact the values and principles appear to be
quite vague. I always assumed that freedom of speech was one
such value, at least in the civilisation I was brought up
in. However, I was shown that this is not the case in the
European Parliament. My views were proclaimed unacceptable."[108]
In an interview with Rose, prime minister Rasmussen recently
the gains of the 2006 cartoon affair: "it was very
encouraging to see a great majority of Danes with Muslim
background supporting fundamental democratic principles
[...N]ot long ago the World Bank named Denmark World
Champion of democracy referring to our fight for free speech
and defense of a free press."[109]
European Parliament let Giertych down on freedom of speech,
but asserted it for the cartoon affair. The World Bank
didn't object, thereby legitimising mendacious reporting and
"racist, anti-Semite" slanders that both suit the ZPC.
Anti-Semitism and anti-Polonism
Wikipedia misrepresents Koneczny's work and underscores
negativities about him: "Koneczny authored extensive
monographs of Byzantine and Jewish civilisations, which he
considered to be less developed than the Latin civilisation
of catholic Europe."[110]
Koneczny didn't denigrate any of the civilizations and
wasn't concerned with the material development. He ranked
societies according to scientific criteria. A prominent
scholar, Koneczny has condemned racism and violent
anti-Semitism, but Wikipedia paints him as a "dedicated
antisemite, who looked for Jewish conspiracies wherever he
could [2]. Koneczny was one of the chief proponents of a
theory that Jewish civilization threatened entire
Latin-Christian world [3]. In his publication Hitleryzm
zażydzony (The Judaized Hitlerism) Koneczny claimed that
Nazism was a product of Jewish civilization. [3]"
Reference [2] contains one unsubstantiated sentence
similar to Wikipedia's. Zionists created Nazism, so
reference [3] is a smear[111]
by Joanna Michlic, known for whitewashing Jewish
contribution to anti-Semitism in Poland, while pointing her
finger at Poles. She dedicates her book to Jacek Kuron (Icek
Kordblum), member of the Jew-dominated Committee for Defence
of Workers (KOR) who have betrayed the Poles by sharing
power and national assets with the Communists. A quest for
scrutiny of former Polish secret service has maneouvered
around KOR members' records. Michlic points out that Wilno
University has dismissed Koneczny, but she doesn't say why:
he has critiqued the government of Marshal Pilsudski who had
been much influenced by the Turanian mentality. Five Polish
liberal MEPs issued a statement opposing Giertych's booklet
because it was based on "the aberrant theory of
civilizations". Liberals are known for aversion to facts,
and they don't represent Poles. One of the MEPs,Bronislaw
Geremek (Berele Lewartow), had subverted Solidarnosc with
Kuron and other Jews and Freemasons.
Michlic supports J.T. Gross's Neighbours and Fear. Both
books reverse the role of WWII victim, Polish nation, whom
Michlic has impressed[112]
to collectively take responsibility for a WWII pogrom by the
Germans in Poland. Michlic and Gross, both sickly
anti-Polish Jews, ignore the Jewish villainy in the
totalitarian structures of the Soviet and Nazi aggressors,
and in the post-WWII Communist regime in Poland. These three
destroyers have jointly murdered most of Polish
intelligentsia and leaders, deported over a million Polish
citizens to the Gulag, and exterminated still uncounted
millions of pre-WWII citizens of multi-national Poland. Some
1.5 million Poles perished of hunger and murder during the
Ukrainian, 1930s famine. Since the end of WWI, the Soviets
murdered 1.25 to 1.5 million Poles living in the USSR . From
1939 to mid-1941, the Soviets murdered more Polish citizens
than did the Nazis.[113]
Michlic can't provide an objective assessment of the Jewish
civilization's threat. Koneczny at least has made
predictions that come true, from the USA to Christian
Russia,[114]
where ZPC power is taking an ever stronger hold. Zionist
distortion of truth instigates hatred, contradicting Michlic
and Jewish pronouncements. It's an obvious manipulation of
education in inter-civilizational strife. The
Europarliament-Wikipedia-Michlic episode proves that there
is a war of ideas between the Jewish and Latin
civilisations, of which Poland is the member most smeared.
Judeocentrists teams up with Germans, in order to de-Nazify
Germans and Zionists, brace the Holocaust Religion, and
claim WWII illegitimate restitutions fom Poland and possibly
prepare for re-settlement of Judeopolonia.
Judeopolonia in Eastern Europe, a concept of a Jewish state
under German protectorate, has been alive since the birth of
Zionism in 19th century Poland.[115]
An official German expansionist concept sees the Germans as
"settlers and bearers of culture outside the present
German-speaking areas".[116]
By eliminating national boundaries in EU, Germany can revert
to the power of ethnic Germans. Less than a century ago
Zionist lobbying in Germany also emphasized that Jews, the
speakers of a German dialect, Yiddish, could bear German
culture Judeopolonia. Return of Jews to their own "region"
might happen, thanks to EU regionalism and economic
centralism that undermine nation states, and bureaucratic
centralism that overrides national parliaments – principles
that Germany has pushed in EU. Case Kosovo establishes a
model for Judeopolonia – ethnic cleansing of an integral
part of a sovereign state, to make room for an alien group,
under combined terror of the "international community" and
the group's extremists.
ZPC's anti-Polonism suits Stalinist- and Communist-Jewish
heirs, too. The Nazification of Poles as irreformable
"anti-Semites" distracts from the Jewish crimes. Stalin's
Jew-dominated NKVD – responsible for "Soviet" genocide of
Poles, staged pogroms in Eastern Europe to show that the
"anti-Semitic, Nazi-like" region should be left in the
Soviet bloc. The "pogroms" also supplied intimidated Jews to
Israel, and diverted Western attention from the WWII NKVD
genocide on Poles and brutal Sovietization and election
frauds for Communist Jewish rule. Poles would fight Soviet
domination, so the Soviets staffed Polish regime with Jews
to make the opposition appear anti-Semitic, which implied
"fascists" guilty of WWII collaboration with the Nazis,
justifying Jew-Communist crimes on Polish patriots. Because
the Soviets didn't trust the "fascist" Poles, the Communist
Jews were tasked with liquidations of post-war resistance ,
and with running the country.
The Nazification of Poles preconditons ducking moral
responsibility and multi-trillion euro reparations still due
to Poles and other victims of the Nazis, Stalin's willing
executioners, and post-WWII Jewish Communists. White-washing
of German Nazis gives Germany a clean slate for EU policy
and expansion, including Judeopolonia. Reversal of the
villain role onto their victims gives German war criminals
and expelees a moral right for WWII restitutions against
victim nations. Same goes for the heirs of Jewish Nazis,
Stalinists and Jewish Communists. German restituiton
organizations have filed cases against Poland before the
European tribunal of human rights in December 2006. At about
the time of Giertych's booklet affair, a delegation of
international Jewish organizations came to Warsaw to advance
their multi-billion dollar claim (27.2.2007) – an
"extraordinary scandal" absent in the official media.[118]
If the Jewish and German claims against Poland prove
successful, small groups of outsiders may control a
significant part of the Polish economy and public life.
Meanwhile, the German and Zionist negative revisionist
campaigns distort history. Misleading of the international
public opinion on Nazi and radical Zionists' WWII crimes may
threaten European stability, as Germany, cleansed of its
WWII liabilities and posing as WWII victim, leads the EU and
presses eastwards. When the countries become wealthy enough
to prey on, international radical Zionists could approach
Byelorussia, Ukraine, Russia and Lithuania with fraudulent
restitutionism. Similarly, the heirs of atrocious Jews in
the Nazi, Soviet and Communist terror apparata can pose as
benevolent proponents of mankind's peace and happiness, and
defenders of Israel's right to exist at the expense of
Palestinians.[119]
Second anniversary
Anti-Muslim provocations were on-going on the second
anniversary of the 2005-2006 cartoon affair. At least 17
Danish newspapers re-published (13.2.2008) the cartoons, in
vow for freedom of expression, a day after Danish police
said it had foiled an alleged murder plot against Kurt
Westergaard, one of the cartoonists. As in 2006, it
signalled equally immature massive re-printing. Although
Germany denied it, their interior minister Wolfgang
Schaeuble had urged: "all European newspapers should now
print these caricatures, with the explanation: We also find
them lousy, but the exercise of press freedom is no reason
to practice violence." Referring to "hundreds of millions of
Muslims worldwide" who regard the cartoons "an outrage",
Arab News found Schaeuble's position "irresponsible and
dangerous": "He knows the massive damage to Germany that can
result from what he said [...] No German paper is allowed to
question the Holocaust. And, what if freedom of the press
stirs up violence? [...] He has sown division between
Germany’s Muslims and non-Muslims and stirred up the
potential for discord and disorder."[120]
OIC secretary general, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu said the
re-printing was "a blatant act of incitement to hatred" and
offensive to the world's 1.3 billion Muslims. He directed
Danish Muslims to legal, democratic protests. OIC would
condemn the plotters once their crime was established.[121]
But in Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, Abu Abir of the Popular
Resistance Committees, a militants' umbrella group, said:
"Blow up the Danish embassies and kill the ambassadors", and
"slaughter" those who drew, printed and published the
cartoons, "immediately".[122]
Egypt banned editions of four Western papers for the
re-printing. One of them, the Wall Street Journal, deviated
from the 2006, US moratorium on Prophet cartoon publications
in the ZPC media, proving that the tactcs had changed since.
In the name of free speech, WSJ featured Rose and other
castigators of Muslims. The Mecca-based Muslim World League
urged Muslims everywhere to maintain calm. Qataris wanted a
ban on import of Danish products in the Islamic world.[123]
Jordanian media recommended severing of diplomatic ties with
Denmark and boycotting Danish goods, in response to the
reprinting that aims "to fan up conflicts among faiths and
civilizations."[124]
Minority leaders at a Karachi convention demanded the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) try the Danes
responsible.[125]
Some Yemeni MPs demanded cutting off friendship and trade
with Denmark, while others called on tempering the
reactions. MP Al-Qadhi called to establish "communication
between Muslims and Danish people", and reminded that Danish
parliament supported Palestinians. Yemeni Sheikh
Abdul-Rahman Qahtan said that the Danish re-publication was
meant to cover Israeli "holocaust" in Gaza, both being
"Zionist-Christian plot against Muslims".[126]
Toger Seidenfaden, executive editor-in-chief of Danish
Politiken was more objective: "there are politicians who are
trying to use these issues to their political advantage,
'creating an enemy' and mobilising people against it", but
violent Muslim demonstrations in 2006 hadn't helped, either.[127]
An upcoming Dutch film Fitna by far-right Dutch MP, Wilders,
was also incidentary. Known for his anti-immigration stance,
Wilders wanted to ban Koran and compared it to Hitler's
texts. The European Commission warned its offices about the
release of Fitna. Afghan MPs staged a protest against Fitna
and the cartoon re-publication. NATO's de Hoop Scheffer
feared risk to troops in Afghanistan. Several Muslim
countries condemned Fitna, including Iran and Pakistan, and
Iran and Egypt considered an economic boycott over the film.
Wilders was aware he might be killed like Dutch film
director van Gogh, murdered by a Jihadist in 2004, after he
made a film critical of Islam.[128]
Dutch prime minister Balkenende asked French president
Sarkozy for solidarity in case of a backlash over Fitna.
Balkenende said that Dutch citizens and businesses risked
attack, and called on Wilders to be accountable. A spokesman
said Sarkozy had suggested setting up a EU fund for
protection of people whose lives were threatened over
freedom of speech issues.[129]
While Turkey's government voiced concern about the film,
Turkish gurus called on the Turkish population to refrain
from violence or protests. Professor Saim Yeprem advised
against any "stance that might justify the film's content
[...T]his film is a product of a planned attack against our
religion". Professor Hakki Oenal said: "Such publications
and broadcasts are a part of a war being waged against Islam
[...W]e will not gain anything from violent acts."[130]
Invoking previous cases of suppressed free speeech, Rose
insisted on the right to it.[131]
He blundered when citing a dissident for basic human rights
Lech Walesa (a.k.a Lejba Kone, ironically a hero in the West),
who was a Communist secret agent co-ordinated by the CIA to
subvert grassroots Solidarnosc. Rose's presumption of
planned murder of Westergaard was as spurious. A Dane of
Moroccan descent and two Tunisians were arrested for
allegedly plotting the murder. The Moroccan was released but
faced charges. The Tunisians were to be deported, even
though there was no proof of their guilt, but in accord with
post-9/11 Denmark's anti-terrorism laws on expulsion of
foreign citizens without a full legal review.[132]
PET chief stressed that the operation was a "preventive
measure" and was based on surveillance carried out over a
period of time.[133]
PET claimed it moved on suspicion. Despite lack of evidence
and a court verdict, the Danish media raced to re-print the
cartoons.
Danish Institute for Human Rights lawyers and a councel of
the Tunisians raised concerns. Franz Wenzel told Danish TV
that the Danish citizen had ben released for lack of
evidence, but the Tunisians would be expelled "without
knowing the reason why or giving them the chance to defend
themselves before a judge".[134]
Rose had no regrets, either, that his 2005 publication led
to more than 100 deaths and perhaps well over a billion
dollars in material damage and loss of business to Danish
firms. Rasmussen stated (19.2.2008) that the expulsions were
necessary to protect Denmark from terrorists, even though no
one has been charged with such a crime. President Bush
hosted (29.2.2008) Rasmussen, reportedly to discuss the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan, which Denmark backed with troops
despite Danish and EU opposition. The invitation to Bush's
ranch showed the close ties between the two.[135]
Frank Kaufmann of the Inter-Religious Federation for World
Peace objected that even if the press waited for a guilty
verdict, it would be an infantile provocation. Given the
adverse effects of the 2006 affair, "a coordinated effort
among 15 newspapers in what is generally regarded as a
modern nation" was "beyond reproach".[136]
The re-publication took place amidst rioting that started on
February 10, also pointing to an opportunistic provocation.
In Beirut, rioting looked planned (17.2.2008). Bus- and
minivanloads of young men began to arrive from all over
Lebanon. They wore headbands and carried identical flags
with calligraphic, Arabic inscriptions. Soon, the crowd
grew to 20,000 men who chanted condemnation of the cartoons.
They walked into a Christian area not far from the Danish
embassy, their target. The police waited with barriers,
fences and fire trucks. A day earlier, a furious mob had
torched the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus,
propagating the violence that had spread from Gaza. In
Beirut, the police and army fired tear gas at the crowd, who
threw stones in response. Sunni clerics tried to calm the
young men down but were ignored or met with stones and
insults. Imam Ibrahim Ibrahim said they were hooligans. When
the police withdrew under the fury, the crowd smashed their
way into the Danish embassy and lit it. Dozens of people had
been wounded or arrested and at least one protester was
killed, caught up in the fire.
A Sunni politician Saiad Hariri observed: "It is the work of
infiltrators [...] They are harming Muslims." The rioters
chased the police up into the Christian quarter, smashing
cars and tossing bricks through boutique and hair salon
windows. They overturned two police cars and threw rocks
through the windows of the St. Maron church. Justice
minister and a Christian, Charles Rizk asked: "What is the
guilt of the [Christian] citizens for caricatures published
in Denmark? This sabotage should stop." Asad Harmoush, a
leader of Gama'a Islamiya, the conservative Sunni group that
had helped organize the protest, tried to deflect the blame.
"We can't control tens of thousands of people. We tried to
limit the harm and we extend our excuses to our brothers in
Achrafieh and to the security forces. There has to be an
investigation. Obviously there were infiltrators." The riots
suddenly ended in the afternoon, when the leaders told the
mob to leave.[137]
Quo
bono?
The Danish affair and its 2008 re-run have radicalized
Muslims whom the West now perceives as more intolerant,
unrestrained and fanatical. The West earned an even deeper
contempt from Muslims. The "Danish cartoons" provocations
exploited religious symbols and extremists, for conflict.
War- and hatemongers have done it on a grand scale in the
recent Balkan wars.[138]
The West re-asserted "freedom of speech" on Islamic and
Christian symbols while upholding Holocaust taboos. David
Irving has been sentenced for hate speech that had a
potential of inciting violence. Rose and JP initiated
hate that had caused the loss of some 140 lives and
substantil material and moral damage on both sides –
violence the media made sure we saw on TV.
After the affair, the Islamic states have pushed through a
UN resolution (30.3.2007) that "prohibits the defamation of
religion". Since its inception, the Human Rights Council has
issued eight resolutions concerning Israel, and none
concerning any other country.[139]
The loser seems to be Christianity. Freedom of speech exists,
but not regarding Holocaustianity that may get added
protection: Germany has proposed a EU law against denial of
mass crimes. The draft refers to crimes of the last 20 years,
including war crimes and alleged genocides in Yugoslavia and
Rwanda, and extends the idea of Holocaust denial to "gross
minimisation of genocide out of racist and xenophobic
motives". A
client of the EU genocide denial law would be Muslims, too.
They claim, against the ICJ ruling[141]
that Milosevic and Serbs have commited genocide in Bosnia.
Western support to radical Muslims in the Balkan wars has
led to declarations of Srebrenica "genocide" as Europe's
largest mass crime after WWII, against evidence[142]
and demonstrably to justify the "humanitarian"
interventionism. Like Shoah has been harnessed in
Holocaustianity, alleged genocide in Bosnia underlines the
Muslim Religion of Victimhood.
Unfounded references to anti-Semitism, neo-Nazism and
nationalism put a question mark over European efforts to
establish and beef up anti-Semitic police and laws, pointing
instead to the ZPC as an initiator of this legalistic
warfare against goyim. Meantime, hundreds of Wahabbi-funded
mosques arose on Serbian lands taken by Bosnian and Albanian
Muslim extremists. In Kosovo, the mosques have replaced 150
Christian churches that Albanian extremists have furiously
and hatefully levelled, destroyed, torched or severely
damaged under UN and NATO eyes. The Christian Orthodox
religion is the greatest loser in the conflicts. It's also
the only one not yet manipulated by the ZPC, and the
religion of ZPC’ pre-declared enemy – Russia. ZPC's neocons
have made Russophobia the vanguard of their 1992 Defense
Planning Guidelines, and it has been reverberating
throughout the neocons' rhetoric for Kosovo secession in
violation of UN resolution 1244 and the international law.
The same mainstream media that have been promoting
Slavophobia are free to blaspheme Christian symbols, but not
Jewish, Holocaustian or Muslim ones. Partly as result of
this campaign, Polish Catholic Church has been devastated
and Serbian Christian craddle given away to hateful aliens,
while the pope says he will continue to heed the "international
community" who are behind the devastation in Poland, Kosovo
and the rest of Serbia and former Yugoslavia. In Warsaw
archbishop Wielgus' case, internationalized by NYT, the
Polish state, dominated by Judeocentrists and masons, has
violated the sovereignty of the Catholic Church. Mainstream
media and polls have played a significant role in the
curtailment of Catholic media and elimination of parties
representing Poland's Catholic majority in the 2007
parliamentary elections.
EU member states translate Brussel's list of "measures to
combat intolerance and discrimination against Muslims" into
national legislation, while "the instances of 'Islamophobia'
[...] are being tracked by the Vienna-based European Union
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. The Centre
routinely refers to 'institutional Islamophobia' as an
inherent social and cultural sickness of most European
societies that needs to be rooted out by education,
re-education, and legislation. Pressure to re-educate "Islamophobic"
Europeans grows with Islamist riots or terrorist acts by
Islamists, "resulting in calls for more understanding of the
'underlying causes' of terrorism (racism, Iraq, poverty, 'fear,'
discrimination, etc, etc etc.) and the insistence on greater
inclusiveness and more stringent anti-Islamophobic
legislation."[143]
The ZPC incapacitates the critics of "Islamophobia" dogmas
in a way similar to the "anti-Semitism" pillory. The ZPC
divides and conquers Europe with the "Islamophobia" sword,
protected by the "anti-Semitism" shield. The strategy of
undermining the Western civilization would fit a theory of
the ZPC connection to the recent Balkan conflicts, through
the US neocons and Zionists in Germany (f.ex. Fischer,
Cohn-Bendit), France (Kouchner, Lévy, Glucksmann), Poland
(Mazowiecki, Edelman)... Support to Balkan Islamists while
ostensibly fighting them elsewhere, in effect weakens
European nations with the Jihadist Fifth Column. The
immigration and multi-culturalism provide another wedge,
justifying the anti-Islamophobic equivalent of the
"anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia" legislation that is
invoked each time the ZPC agenda encounters opposition.
--------------------------------
Piotr Bein is an independent author and researcher who
travels in various cultural regions. The
International Comparative Genocide Research project at the
Hiroshima City University has commissioned two research
papers from him: one on Polish-Jewish relations and another
on the Balkan conflict. He has committed two books on
the latter topic.
[52]Response
by the Danish Government..., op cit.