Category Archives: Israel

American presidents are required to love the Jewish people

Imagine if a Brit demands that American presidents are required to love the British people. Or a French demanding that American presidents are required to love the French people. Or a Mexican demanding that American presidents are required to love the Mexican people. Or a Chinese demanding that American presidents are required to love the Chinese people.

You would react to the demands by scratching your head, followed by outrage.

bernard-henri-levy

But that’s precisely what a Jewish intellectual named Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote in an op/ed for the New York Times on January 19, 2017. Wikipedia describes Lévy as being named in 2010 by The Jerusalem Post as 45th on a list of the world’s 50 most influential Jews; The Boston Globe said Lévy is “perhaps the most prominent intellectual in France today”.

In his op/ed, Lévy writes that:

  • There is a “law” that “love of the Jewish people” is “required of an American president in dealings affecting Israel”.
  • Despite admitting that he doesn’t know Trump’s “heart,” Lévy regards President Trump’s acts of friendship toward Israel with suspicion and accuses Trump of not being “sincere” in his love for Israel. In other words, President Trump is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t — which, in psychological parlance, is a classic example of “make crazy”.
  • Despite admitting that he doesn’t know Trump’s “heart,” Lévy perceives in Trump’s past words and behaviors a “contempt” toward Jews, which makes Trump an anti-Semite and may lead him to “quietly taking revenge” against Jews.
  • Lévy calls President Trump “the kitschy builder with his flamboyant hair” who labors under an inferiority complex vis-à-vis Jews, a “pig farmer” and a “swineherd” (which of course implies Americans who had voted for Trump are “swine”): it is “the triumph of nihilism” in America that could “enable a pig farmer — anybody — to become emperor,” who is “eager for revenge” and will show “Jews that he indeed is smarter than they are.”
  • Lévy regards the 2016 election wherein the “swineherds” voted Trump as President as a symptom of an America where “thought is attacked” and “lies” flourish “with arrogance and flamboyance”.
  • Lévy then calls on his fellow Jews in the U.S. not to believe in or trust President Trump because any “capitulation” is “tantamount to suicide” — in order words, Lévy is calling on Jewish-Americans to oppose President Trump.
  • The essay is also full of narcissism: Lévy refers to Jews as highly intelligent, bringing light to civilization, and exceptional in their “wisdom” and “intellectual, moral and human excellence“.
  • After insulting President Trump by calling him a “pig farmer,” and insulting Trump voters by calling us “swineherds,” Lévy has the audacity to say he only has “love” in his heart for America.

To call Lévy and his op/ed insane is being kind.

Read it for yourself. Below is the entirety of Lévy’s essay. I supplied the bold red emphasis:

Bernard-Henri Lévy: Jews, Be Wary of Trump

Bernard-Henri Lévy
THE STONE JAN. 19, 2017

A few weeks back, both Israel and American Jews were betrayed by Barack Obama. By allowing the United Nations Security Council to pass a resolution condemning Israeli settlement building, the outgoing president took the easy way out at their expense.

But today the risk is that Israel and America’s Jews (as well as those of other countries) should harbor the same illusions of true support that they did during the Obama administration, and be strung along before being betrayed again, this time by President Donald J. Trump.

One might object that Mr. Trump has given ample evidence of his benevolence — for example, by naming a friend of Israel to serve as ambassador, by promising the transfer of the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and by asking his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, an orthodox Jew and the grandson of Holocaust survivors, to advise him on the peace process in the White House. Aren’t these decisive steps that should reassure Jews who support Israel?

Yes and no.

There is a law that governs the relations between the Jews and the rest of the world. That law was articulated in one form at the time of the trial of Adolf Eichmann, when the great Jewish thinker Gershom Scholem faulted Hannah Arendt for falling short of “ahavat Israel” — for showing insufficient “love of the Jewish people.”

This love is precisely what is required of an American president in dealings affecting Israel.

In such circumstances, and contrary to the adage that applies in most ordinary circumstances of life, that law says that demonstrations of love count for less, paradoxically, than love itself. It says, to be precise, that gestures of friendship, when they do not come from the bottom of the heart and are not built on sincere love — that is, finally, on a deep and true knowledge of the love object — are gestures that eventually may turn into their opposite.

To put an even finer point on it, we cannot rule out the possibility that Trump’s series of ostentatiously promising signals directed at Israel may have sinister effects in the long or even short term.

Those signals may, for example, strengthen the most shortsighted and therefore suicidal fringe of Israeli politics. It may send the wrong signal to those who would be only too happy to see the United States set the example of making unilateral, unnegotiated decisions, thereby opening the way to other shows of force. In the United States, it may generate an overly enthusiastic embrace by pro-Israel Jews of a volatile president (one likely, depending on the needs of his deals, to change his mind), one who is so deeply unpopular with so many Americans that his embrace of Israel, however fleeting, could endanger the bipartisan consensus that has been so beneficial to Israel over the decades.

I cannot claim any knowledge of Donald Trump’s “heart” or of the sincerity of his commitment to the Jewish state. But there have been indications going back decades.

One was provided by John O’Donnell, a former chief operating officer of Trump’s Atlantic City casino, who, in his 1991 book “Trumped!” quoted Trump as saying: “The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

More recently, there was a 2013 tweet storm in which, desperate to show that he was “smarter” than the “overrated” Jon Stewart, Trump saw fit to rip off the mask behind which stood Jonathan Leibowitz, the Jewish name Stewart was born with.

And then, in mid-campaign, there was the meeting in which Trump told donors from the Republican Jewish Coalition: “I know why you’re not going to support me! It’s because I don’t want your money.”

These statements suggest, to say the least, a certain contempt.

More precisely, they reflect that well-known variety of contempt that, according to Freud, serves to anticipate and defend the ego against the presumed contempt of the other.

Whether the original disdain is real or imaginary matters little.

Whether Jon Stewart or the Jewish Republican donors disdained the kitschy builder with his flamboyant hair, his money, his bling and his properties, including the now world-famous Trump Tower, is obviously not the question.

The essential thing is that President Trump thinks they did, that he seems to see Jews as the caricature of the New York establishment that, for decades, took him for an agreeable but vulgar showman.

This is a perfect example of the self-defensive contempt that has so often fed anti-Semitism, with the Jews appearing, once again, as representatives of an elite that patronized him and against whom he can, now that he is in power, quietly take his revenge.

It reminds me of a story from the Talmud that illustrates this logic well.

It is the story — part history and part “aggadic” embellishment — of Rabbi Yehudah Nessia, one of the foremost figures of Jewish thought of the third century.

Rabbi Yehudah ran a school that a young Roman swineherd would pass by nearly every day. The students at the school, their heads full of knowledge and a sense of their own superiority, never missed a chance to mock and beat the pig farmer.

Years later, Rabbi Yehudah was summoned to the distant city of Caesarea Philippi, to appear before Roman Emperor Diocletian. It seemed that the emperor was full of consideration for his guest. He sent to him one of his most distinguished ambassadors and ordered that a sumptuous bath be provided to allow his guest to cleanse himself after his dusty voyage.

But Diocletian also sent his ambassador on a Friday, so that Rabbi Yehudah would be forced to travel on the Sabbath, violating the most important of commandments.

The emperor also heated the baths to such a degree that the rabbi would have been boiled to death — a fate from which the rabbi was saved by the last-minute intervention of an angel, who cooled the waters.

When the rabbi appeared before Diocletian, he recognized the former swineherd, who said to him with spite, “Just because your god performs miracles, you think you can scorn the emperor?”

I cite this story because it provides a good metaphor for the West today, where, as in ancient Rome, the triumph of nihilism can enable a pig farmer — anybody — to become emperor.

It is a good example, too, of Jewish wisdom, which responds to the situation as follows: “We had contempt for Diocletian the swineherd, but we are ready to honor Diocletian the emperor provided he, like Saul — who, before becoming king had tended donkeys — heeds the prophecy, rises to his office, and becomes a new man.”

And, above all, it is a good allegory of the double-edged favors, or, if you will, the poison apples, proffered by a humiliated swineherd, eager for revenge, who decides to show Jon Stewart and his fellow Jews that he is indeed smarter than they are.

In the face of this situation, nothing is more important, it seems to me, than to maintain a measure of distance.

Like all other American citizens, Jews must respect the president-elect in the forms provided in the Constitution. But they must not fall into the trap of believing in his inconsistent and ultimately double-edged benevolence. They must not forget that, no matter how many times Mr. Trump declares his love for Israel, for Benjamin Netanyahu or anyone else, he will remain a bad shepherd who respects only power, money and the perquisites of his palaces, while caring nothing for miracles, of course, and not a whit for the vocation of study and the cultivation of intelligence that are the light of the Jewish tradition.

And they should be aware, finally, that in this period that has been labeled, for lack of a better word, populist, and of which the American election is but an outsize symptom; in a time when thought is attacked from all sides and when lies are flourished with unparalleled arrogance and aplomb; in this new political culture that has now encircled the earth, one in which, from the American plutocrats to their Russian oligarch cousins, the swineherds slap their pedigree shamelessly on imperial palaces, the little Jewish nation has no part to play.

To ally with that sort of “populism” would be to betray Israel’s calling.

To surrender to Diocletian would be to betray oneself and to take the terrible risk of no longer being who one is.

For the heirs of a people whose endurance over millenniums was because of the miracle of a tradition of thought nourished, rekindled and resown with each generation and through a constantly refined body of commentary, the challenge is clear: Any sacrifice of the calling to intellectual, moral and human excellence; any renunciation of the duty of exceptionalism that — from Rabbi Yehuda to Kafka and from Rashi to Proust and Levinas — has provided the ferment for its almost incomprehensible resistance; any concession, in a word, to Trumpian nihilism would be the most atrocious of capitulations, one tantamount to suicide.

I say this out of an old and enduring love that forms the core of my being, love not only for Israel but also for the world’s greatest democracy, the United States of America.

________

Bernard-Henri Lévy is a French philosopher, filmmaker and activist. His most recent book is “The Genius of Judaism.”

Lévy’s op/ed was republished WITHOUT comment by Steve Sailer for The Unz Review on January 19, 2017. The republishing of Lévy’s essay WITHOUT comment by Sailer elicited this comment from someone who identifies himself as Leon Feldman, Director of the Cyber-Hate Division of the Anti-Defamation League, in which Feldman accuses the republishing of Lévy’s op/ed to be anti-semitism and demands that The Unz Review take down the essay in 24 hours. Here’s the screenshot I took of Feldman’s comment:

comment-by-loren-feldman-of-adl

See also:

~Eowyn

Advertisements

Neo-con Bill Kristol finds Trump’s ‘America First’ vulgar and embarrassing

I’ve said before that neo-conservatives are warmongers.

Bill Kristol is a prominent neo-conservative. From Wikipedia:

“William ‘Bill’ Kristol (born December 23, 1952) is an American conservative political analyst and commentator. He is the founder and editor at large of the political magazine The Weekly Standard and a political commentator on several networks.”

kristol-betrayalBill Kristol has been hostile to Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy from the start. See:

In a tweet today, reacting to President Trump’s inaugural speech, Kristol‘s phony conservatism is unmasked. He says he is embarrassed by, and finds it “profoundly depressing and vulgar to hear an American President proclaim ‘America First’.”

Here’s his tweet:

bill-kristol-tweet

So Bill Kristol, the neo-conservative, is a warmonger and a “globalist” who thinks an American president who puts America’s interests first is vulgar, depressing, and embarrassing.

The questions that then must be asked are:

If not America, which nation should come first for an American president?

In whose interests does Kristol warmonger?

From Wikipedia:

“Kristol is associated with a number of prominent conservative think tanks . . . [and] serves on the board of the Emergency Committee for Israel . . . .

Kristol was born on December 23, 1952 in New York City, into a Jewish family. His father, Irving Kristol was an editor and publisher who served as the managing editor of Commentary magazine . . . and has been described as the “godfather of neoconservatism”

If you’re an American who loves America, why would you listen to this man or read his magazine The Weekly Standard?

See also “Jewish Anti-Defamation League says Trump’s ‘America First’ is anti-Semitic”.

~Eowyn

Reptilians and ETs, oh my!

This is a fun post. Make of the images what you will.

A shape-shifting reptilian disguised as a Secret Service agent at the 2012 AIPAC conference?

Here’s a screenshot I took at the 1:32 mark from the video below:

reptilian-secret-service-agent-at-2012-aipac-conference

An ET (extra-territorial) posing as a human female at the 2011 AIPAC conference?

Here’s a screenshot I took at the 3:32 mark from the video below:

et-in-audience-at-2011-aipac-conference-3-32

So what is AIPAC?

Simply put, AIPAC is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — one of the most powerful lobbies for Israel in Washington, DC.

This is what AIPAC says on its “About” page:

“The mission of AIPAC is to strengthen, protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of the United States and Israel.”

From Wikipedia:

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a lobbying group that advocates pro-Israel policies to the Congress and Executive Branch of the United States. The current President of AIPAC is Lillian Pinkus.

One of several pro-Israel lobbying organizations in the U.S., AIPAC states that it has more than 100,000 members, seventeen regional offices, and “a vast pool of donors.” California Congressman Brad Sherman has called AIPAC “the single most important organization in promoting the U.S.-Israel alliance.” In addition, the organization has been called one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the United States. The group does not raise funds for political candidates itself, but its members raise money for candidates through PACs AIPAC helped establish and by other means.

Its critics have stated it acts as an agent of the Israeli government with a “stranglehold” on the United States Congress with its power and influence. The group has been accused of being strongly allied with the Likud party of Israel, and the Republican Party in the US, but an AIPAC spokesman has called this a “malicious mischaracterization.”[6] The Washington Post described the perceived differences between AIPAC and J Street: “While both groups call themselves bipartisan, AIPAC has won support from an overwhelming majority of Republican Jews, while J Street is presenting itself as an alternative for Democrats who have grown uncomfortable with both Netanyahu’s policies and the conservatives’ flocking to AIPAC.”

In other words, AIPAC is the Israeli-Jewish lobby for Republicans; J Street is AIPAC’s counterpart for Democrats.

It turns out this post isn’t really such a fun post after all. Sorry 😦

See also:

~Eowyn

This is why Obama & Hillary demonize Russia

On August 31, 2016, Hillary Clinton threatened Russia with war. Accusing Russia of “hacking into the Democratic National Committee and even some state election systems,” she said:

“So we’ve got to step up our game, make sure we are well defended and able to take the fight to those who go after us. As President, I will make it clear that United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack. We will be ready with serious political, economic, and military responses.“

The Obama administration has accused Russia of hacking the emails that WikiLeaks has been releasing to the public, but we are not told or shown the evidence that Russia is the culprit.

Last night, WikiLeaks‘ founder and editor-in-chief Julian Assange’s Internet connection was cut off, severing the only connection Assange has with the world outside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where he’d sought refuge. (See “The Evil Empire strikes back: WikiLeaks’ Internet connection severed; RT’s bank accounts frozen“)

Obama gave orders to the CIA to prep for a cyber attack on Russia, while Russians recently prepared for war with a massive nation-wide civil defense drill.

The latest: Speaking for the Obama administration, Vice President Joe Biden threatened Russia with nuclear war.

On NBC’s Meet the Press yesterday (Oct. 16), Biden said that “We have the capacity to do it [nuclear war], and, uh,… it’ll be at a time of our choosing, and under circumstances that have the greatest impact,” and that “Obama had sent a message to Putin”.  When asked by NBC’s Chuck Todd “will the public know?,” Biden replied, “Hope not.”

Writing for Russia Insider, historian Eric Zuesse gives his take on what Biden said and meant:

“In other words: what Biden is saying, is that, if Trump wins this election, then there is going to be some sudden, unannounced, U.S. government response against Putin, and that only after it is over, will the U.S. government explain to the public why it did what it did.” […]

There have been many reports in the U.S. press saying that Obama has, ever since at least October 6th, been contemplating an all-out U.S. bombing campaign to bring down Assad. But that would mean war with Russia, which has been actively bombing Nusra and all the other jihadists in Syria.

Hillary Clinton is urging a “no-fly zone” in Syria, so that we can do to Assad what we did to another ally of Moscow, Muammar Gaddafi. However, when that was done to Gaddafi, Putin stood aside and wasn’t supplying military assistance to Gaddafi, which would have enabled Gaddafi to wipe out the fundamentalist Muslims who were trying to overthrow him. Russia is involved actively, this time, to prevent happening in Syria what happened in Libya. A no-fly zone in Syria would thus mean U.S. war against Russia.

These are tense times. Any escalation that the U.S. can do against Russia, can be met by an escalation that Russia can do against the United States.

Consequently, whatever escalation Obama is now threatening against Putin, might be met by an escalation on the other side. Where will it stop, or would it even be able to stop?

Whatever escalation Obama might consider to be ‘proportionate’, could consequently end up ending the world as we know it — and not for the better. Hillary Clinton has threatened Putin with war; now Barack Obama has done likewise.

Whatever Biden’s assignment here actually was from Obama, one thing about it is clear: this President is determined that Hillary Clinton be his successor, and Obama will target anyone who gets in his way if he doesn’t get his way on this. And Obama wants the American public to know that this is how he feels about the matter.

This Biden-interview is really intended, in that sense, to be a threat aimed at America’s voters, telling them, telling each one of us: Vote for Hillary Clinton, or else! He’s not telling us what that “or else!” is going to be — and maybe he himself has no accurate idea of how far it will ultimately cycle and go. Ultimately, whatever he thinks it would be, might not turn out to be the last step in this cycle of escalation — unless it’s going to go directly to a blitz attack against Russia.

Obama is thus coercing us, before he coerces Putin. He’s telling us: If we vote against Hillary Clinton — if she loses this election — then President Obama has something in mind that we won’t like — and he won’t wait until the next President is inaugurated on 20 January 2017 to do it, whatever ‘it’ might be.

Obama here is threatening not only Vladimir Putin, but the American people. Even if Obama truly believes that he alone possesses all the power, he does not, unless he possesses the power to terrorize America’s voters to elect Hillary Clinton, even if we otherwise would not.”

To sane people, the enmity that the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton have toward Russia and their eagerness to go to war against Russia appear irrational, bordering on madness.

Here’s why.

From Pravoslavie.ru (via Russia Insider), Oct. 17, 2016:

gay-pride-2016-tel-aviv10 Cities in Central Russia Refuse to Hold ‘Gay Pride’ Parades

The events are incompatible with the moral values held by the majority of Russians

The Administrations of Voronezh and Tambov do not approve of LGTB activists’ applications for holding meetings and marches in support of sexual minorities in Russia planned for early October.

The Voronezh administration received notification about a gay pride parade planned for October 10 and a meeting against the Federal Law banning the promotion of non-traditional sexual relations among minors on October 13.

“Considering the fact that they wanted to promote non-traditional sexual relations among minors, they were refused as there is a ban on spreading information inflicting harm to children’s health and development,” the press service of the Voronezh mayor’s office told Interfax.

The Tambov administration also told the agency that they did not agree to hold events aimed at “attracting public attention to non-traditional sexual relations.”

Authorities of certain cities of the Central Federal District – Tula, Kaluga, Ivanovo, Belgorod, Vladimir, Oryol, Ryazan and Kursk refused to allow representatives of the LGTB community to hold gay pride parades.

See also “Joe Biden tells 13-year-old girl he’s ‘horny’?“.

And then, of course, there are these:

putin-kisses-icon-of-madonna-and-child

Putin reverently kisses icon of Madonna and Child Jesus

putin-and-jesus-iconputin-makes-sign-of-crossrussian-military-christian1russian-military-christian

An Orthodox Christian priest blesses military conscripts at a conscription point in downtown Moscow, Nov. 26, 2010. (AP Photo/Mikhail Metzel)

An Orthodox Christian priest blesses military conscripts at a conscription point in downtown Moscow, Nov. 26, 2010. (AP Photo/Mikhail Metzel)

~Eowyn

It’s war: CIA prepping for cyber attack on Russia

The Obama administration has been itching to go to war with Russia — first, over Ukraine/Crimea; then, over Syria because the Russian military actually attacks ISIS and the jihadist Syrian “rebels” while Obama (and Israel and Saudi Arabia) wants to topple Syria’s Assad government who is friendly toward Christians.

See “U.S. breaks off talks with Russia, as Russians prepare for war with massive civil defense drill

The latest “reason” is the Obama administration’s accusation that Russia hacked the emails of the DNC, then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton, and John Podesta, the chair of Hillary’s presidential campaign campaign — emails that WikiLeaks has been leaking, to the Dems’ embarrassment.

See, for example:

But according to WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange, it was a murdered DNC staffer who was the source of leaked DNC emails.

Now comes ominous news that the CIA is preparing to launch a cyber attack on Russia.

cyberwarNBC News reports, Oct. 14, 2016:

The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.

Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging “clandestine” cyber operation designed to harass and “embarrass” the Kremlin leadership.

The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation. Former intelligence officers told NBC News that the agency had gathered reams of documents that could expose unsavory tactics by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Vice President Joe Biden told “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that “we’re sending a message” to Putin and that “it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact.” [But] When asked if the American public will know a message was sent, the vice president replied, “Hope not.”

[…] Sean Kanuck, who was until this spring the senior U.S. intelligence official responsible for analyzing Russian cyber capabilities, said not mounting a response would carry a cost.

“If you publicly accuse someone,” he said, “and don’t follow it up with a responsive action, that may weaken the credible threat of your response capability.”

President Obama will ultimately have to decide whether he will authorize a CIA operation. Officials told NBC News that for now there are divisions at the top of the administration about whether to proceed.

[…] Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell expressed skepticism that the U.S. would go so far as to attack Russian networks.

“Physical attacks on networks is not something the U.S. wants to do because we don’t want to set a precedent for other countries to do it as well, including against us,” he said. “My own view is that our response shouldn’t be covert — it should overt, for everybody to see.” [Good luck with that, Morrell, because this news of CIA prepping cyber war is out. -Eowyn]

The Obama administration is debating just that question, officials say — whether to respond to Russia via cyber means, or with traditional measures such as sanctions.

The CIA’s cyber operation is being prepared by a team within the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence, documents indicate. According to officials, the team has a staff of hundreds and a budget in the hundreds of millions, they say. […]

While the National Security Agency is the center for American digital spying, the CIA is the lead agency for covert action and has its own cyber capabilities. […] According to documents leaked by Edward Snowden, the CIA requested $685.4 million for computer network operations in 2013, compared to $1 billion by the NSA.

Retired Gen. Mike Hayden, who ran the CIA after leading the NSA, wrote this year: “We even had our own cyber force, the Information Operations Center (IOC), that former CIA director George Tenet launched and which had grown steadily under the next spy chief, Porter Goss, and me. The CIA didn’t try to replicate or try to compete with NSA… the IOC was a lot like Marine Corps aviation while NSA was an awful lot like America’s Air Force.”

Does Obama seriously think Russia won’t counterattack if the U.S. launches a cyber attack? And are we prepared to withstand cyber war with Moscow (and perhaps China, too), given head of Cyber Command and director of the National Security Agency Gen. Keith Alexander’s warning in February 2014 that the U.S. military is not prepared for cyber war?

War with Russia will also be Obama’s perfect excuse to suspend the November election.

~Eowyn

ISIS: Allah commands us not to fight Israel & Jews

Have you, as I have, noticed how ISIS or the Islamic State are slaughtering Christians across the swath of the Middle East, but not Jews? Not even one?

Why is that?

According to a curious article on the website of the Arabic-language Egyptian newspaper, Egypt Independent, which was founded in 2011 and headquartered in Cairo, ISIS claims that their god Allah commands them not to fight Israel or Jews. Instead, ISIS’s immediate enemies and targets should be apostates — a word that variously means turncoat, heretic, atheist, or infidel. The article then makes a historical reference to how Saladin (1137-1193), the Sunni Muslim military commander, had fought Shiite Muslims first before capturing Jerusalem. The implication is that ISIS should focus on fighting fellow Muslims who are “apostates,” and conquering countries like Iraq and Syria.

Note: ISIS is the acronym for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. It has another acronym, ISIL, favored by Obama, which stands for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. (The Levant is a geographical term that in its widest historical sense included all of the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores, extending from Greece to Cyrenaica. Today, Levant consists of the island of Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, and part of southern Turkey.) Daesh is the acronym of the Arabic name for ISIL: al-Dawlah al-Islamīyah fī al-ʻIrāq wa-al-Shām.

New Levant

Below is the Google translation (with some editing on my part to render it less gibberish) of the Arabic essay by Bassam Ramadan, “Daesh: Allah commands us not to fight Israel,” Egypt Independent, Sept. 7, 2014. I inserted the explanatory notes, colored teal.

He said the organization of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Daesh), Allah in the Qur’an commands us not to fight Israel or Jews, but fight the apostates and hypocrites

Daesh said in a tweet on the page used to publish data and information operations: “Question the Saudi people who defends Juggernaut. Does your country kill the apostate. Apostles and companions, Ashraf people ordered us to kill the apostate. (Note: Ashraf refers to someone who is a direct blood-line descendant from Muhammad by way of his daughter Fatimah.)

On questions about why Daesh does not fight Israel but will fight the people of Iraq and Syria, Daesh said in a separate tweet: “In the Qur’an, God speaks of the near enemy and the hypocrites as more dangerous than the original unbelievers. (Note: In the context of this essay, “original unbelievers” is a reference to Jews.) The answer was at Abu Bakr’s feet while fighting the apostates to open Jerusalem, which opened after the Umar bin al-Khattab. (Note: Abu Bakr was the father of Muhammad’s child-bride, Aisha, and a trusted advisor to Muhammad. Umar bin al-Khattab, who was hostile to Islam before his conversion, succeeded Abu Bakr as the second caliph.)

Daesh added that “The answer is seen in what Saladin and Nur ad-Din did. They fought Shiites in more than 50 battles in Egypt and Syria before Jerusalem. Saladin was told: ‘Fight Shiites, the Ubaydi state in Egypt, and leave the Roman Crusaders to occupy Jerusalem. Do not fight the Crusaders.’ (Note: Saladin was the first sultan of Egypt and Syria and the founder of the Ayyubid dynasty. A Sunni Muslim of Kurdish origin, Saladin led the Muslim military campaign against the Crusader states in the Levant. At the height of his power, his sultanate included Egypt, Syria, Upper Mesopotamia, the Hejaz, Yemen and other parts of North Africa.)

Daesh said: “Jerusalem will not be liberated until we get rid of these idols, the likes of Al Alinvtaiwih and all these families and pawns of [western] colonialism that controls the fate of the Muslim world.”

Of course, if ISIS is actually a creature of the CIA and the Mossad, as some claim — a claim that I have avoided looking into, dreading what I might uncover — then it’s a no-brainer why ISIS has not and will not fight Israel or Jews.

See also:

H/t 12160

~Eowyn

Defeated Egyptian judoka refuses to shake hands with Israeli rival

Sore anti-semite loser.

From Daily Mail: Defeated Egyptian judo fighter Islam El Shehaby was loudly booed when he refused to shake hands with his Israeli rival.

Or Sasson, ranked fifth in the world, defeated El Shehaby in the first round with about a minute and half remaining in the bout. At the end of the fight the Egyptian refused to shake Sasson’s hand, in a major breach of judo etiquette.

Judo players typically bow or shake hands at the beginning and end of a match, as a sign of respect in the Japanese martial art. When Sasson extended his hand, El Shehaby backed away, shaking his head. The Israeli then walked off in disgust.

The referee called El Shehaby back to the mat and obliged him to bow, and he gave a quick nod of his head. He refused to comment afterwards.

Prior to the fight, El Shahaby had come under pressure from Islamist-leaning and nationalist voices in Egypt to withdraw entirely.

One angry follower on Twitter said: ‘You will shame Islam. If you lose, you will shame an entire nation and yourself. We don’t want to think what will happen if you lost to an Israeli. Victory will give you nothing. How can you cooperate with a murderous nation?’

Mataz Matar, a TV host in Al-Sharq Islamist-leaning network had also urged him to pull out. He said: ‘My son watch out, don’t be fooled, or fool yourself thinking you will play with the Israeli athlete to defeat him and make Egypt happy. Egypt will cry; Egypt will be sad and you will be seen as a traitor and a normalizer in the eyes of your people.’

Despite the snub, the International Judo Federation had claimed the fact the fight even went ahead was a major sign of progress.

Spokesman Nicolas Messner said: ‘This is already a big improvement that Arabic countries accept to (fight) Israel.’ He added how there was no obligation to shake hands, but to bow is mandatory. He said El Shehaby’s attitude ‘will be reviewed after the games to see if any further action should be taken’.

Sasson later defeated Poland’s Maciej Sarnacki, qualifying for the quarter finals, where he will face Dutch competitor Roy Meyer.

DCG