Urgent:US Forces are planning to destroy “Samara Dam” to use it as a pretext to attack Iran?

May 11, 2007

Haq Agency received serious information indicates that occupation forces preventing vehicles from crossing “Samara Dam” bridge [see it on Goolge maps], claiming there is a truck loaded with explosives on the bridge.

Rumors spreading around Samara city saying that the occupation forces intend to bomb the dam and claiming that it is done by a suicide car bomb.

Iraqirabita reported earlier that there are suspicious activities by team of divers in Al-thrthar lake under the base the Samara Dam, No one knows what they are doing or planning.

Destroying the Dam will flood most of Baghdad, surrounding cities will be totally under water [Fallujha, Samara, Haditha, and hundreds of small villages….military plan???].

History

Build in 1954, extended to 5 km, the Dam was made for irrigation and controlling the floods of Tigris and Euphrates, creating Al-thurthar Lake, which is one of the most beautiful artificial lakes in Iraq.

The dam was modified later by “Uruk Co” to generate electric power to the Iraq’s western regions.

A very important natural vegetations reservation area in Iraq, some of rare water birds spend the winter around Thurthar Lake.

Source: http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2007/05/10/urgent-occupation-forces-are-planning-to-destroy-samara-dam/


Islam and Other Religions

May 11, 2007

[Say: We believe in God, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the Prophets from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another.] (Aal `Imran 3:84)

As is borne out by this command of God in the Qur’an, Muslims must believe in all the prophets of God previously sent to humanity. This means that they are not permitted to show any disrespect to any prophet or to the religion he taught to his followers. To a Muslim, religious belief must come out of a person’s free choice, as God has also commanded not to use any kind of coercion in the matter of religion:

[Let there be no compulsion in religion, truth stands out clear from error.] (Al-Baqarah 2:256)

It is the conviction of a religion’s adherents, not the compulsion they can impose on others, that establishes its moral force on earth. This was a principle evident in the life and practice of theProphet Muhammad (peace be on him) as well as the Constitution of Madinah which he drew up with the multi-religious community of Madinah.This document guaranteed the freedom of worship to all religious communities. This was the spirit of the Qur’an that shines into the hearts of all its perceptive readers: the spirit of tolerance and understanding. Allah says in the Qur’an that He has made people into nations and tribes so that they can know and deal with each other in an equal temper of kindness and generosity:

[O humankind! We created you from a single pair of a male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know and deal with each other in kindness (not that you may despise each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of God (is he who is) the most righteous of you, and God is Knower, Aware.] (Al-Hujurat 49:13)

The above verse emphasizes the point that in Islam there is no place for intolerance, prejudice, or bigotry based on color, race, nationality or any such considerations. This all-encompassing tolerance of Islam applies to all elements of life and all affairs of Muslims.The Muslim’s acceptance of the Jews and Christians (referred to in the Qur’an as People of the Book) as authentic religious communities is made clear:

[And dispute not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong and injury.] (Al-`Ankabut 29:46).

This verse tells Muslims that they should take all measures to avoid dispute, anger or other negative feelings between themselves and others.

A Historical Context

In his book, More in Common Than You Think: Bridge Between Islam and Christianity, Dr. William Baker explains how Muslims view the Torah and the New Testament as inspired revelations of God and how Islam neither targeted the Jews nor Judaism.In his article “The Prophet of Islam and the Jews: Basis of Conduct, Acceptance, Respect and Cooperation”, Fysal Burhan quotes Dr. Baker: “It is a fact of history that when the Jews were being persecuted in Europe during the middle ages they found peace, harmony, and acceptance among the Muslim people of Spain. In fact, this was the era of Jewish history that they themselves refer to as “the golden age.”Marmaduke Pickthall, whose translation of the meanings of the Qur’an remains one of the most popular today, also commented on the subject:In Spain under the Umayyads and in Baghdad under the Abbasid Khalifas, Christians and Jews, equally with Muslims, were admitted to the Schools and universities – not only that, but were boarded and lodged in hostels at the cost of the state. When the Moors were driven out of Spain, the Christian conquerors held a terrific persecution of the Jews. Those who were fortunate enough to escape fled, some of them to
Morocco and many hundreds to the Turkish empire, where their descendants still live in separate communities, and still speak among themselves an antiquated form of Spanish. The Muslim empire was a refuge for all those who fled from persecution by the Inquisition.

The Western Christians, till the arrival of the Encyclopaedists in the eighteenth century, did not know and did not care to know, what the Muslim believed, nor did the Western Christian seek to know the views of Eastern Christians with regard to them. The Christian Church was already split in two, and in the end, it came to such a pass that the Eastern Christians, as Gibbon shows, preferred Muslim rule, which allowed them to practice their own form of religion and adhere to their peculiar dogmas, to the rule of fellow Christians who would have made them Roman Catholics or wiped them out…If Europe had known as much of Islam, as Muslims knew of Christendom, in those days, those mad, adventurous, occasionally chivalrous and heroic, but utterly fanatical outbreak known as the Crusades could not have taken place, for they were based on a complete misapprehension…It was not until the Western nations broke away from their religious law that they became more tolerant; and it was only when the Muslims fell away from their religious law that they declined in tolerance and other evidences of the highest culture. Before the coming of Islam it had never been preached as an essential part of religion.” (Madras Lectures on Islam)

The Prophet’s Pluralistic Constitution

The Qur’an never claimed to teach a new religion. It consistently contextualized the Prophet Muhammad as being the final messenger in a long line of messengers from Allah confirming the truth of all earlier scriptures. This continuity is clear in the respect the Prophet showed to people of other religions.Muhammad’s mission was to restore the pure religion of Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus. The Islamic view of earlier religions is clear from the following verses of the Qur’an:

[The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah--which We have sent by inspiration to thee (O Muhammad)--and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus… Call (them to the Faith), and stand steadfast as thou art commanded, follow not thou their vain desires; but say: "I believe in whatever Book Allah has sent down; and I am commanded to judge justly between you. Allah is our Lord and your Lord: for us (is the responsibility for) our deeds, and for you for your deeds. There is no contention between us and you. Allah will bring us together, and to Him is (our) final goal.] (Ash-Shura 42:13 & 15)

It was in the year 622 CE that the Prophet came to Madinah after a period of thirteen years of preaching Islam to the Quraish tribe in Makkah. In Madinah he found many who were ready to receive him and help him in his mission. At that time, the city of Madinah and its surrounding area was home to many Jewish and Arab tribes. There were also people of various racial and national origins including Romans, Persians and Ethiopians living in Madinah.Taking into consideration the hopes and aspirations of this community of multi-religious background, the Prophet Muhammad drew up the basic principles of a pluralistic constitution. In addition, it established the rights and equality of every citizen before the law, as well as freedom of religion, trade and speech.

The constitution spelled out the political rights and duties of both the Jews and Muslims to protect each other from every threat to their security and to uphold moral conduct and fair dealing.Part of the constitution reads as follows:The Jews of Banu `Awf are one nation with the Muslims; the Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs, their freedmen and their persons shall be protected except those who behave unjustly or sinfully, for they hurt but themselves and their families. The same applies to the Jews of Banu an-Najjar, Banu al-Harith, Banu Sa’idah, Banu Jusham, Banu al-Aws, Banu Tha’labah, and the Jafnah, clan of the Tha’labah and Banu al-Shua’ibah. Doing good deeds is a protection against sinfulness. …….There is no responsibility except for one’s own deeds….This document shall not constitute any protection for the unjust or the wrongdoers.
Whoever goes out to fight or stays at home is safe in the city, unless he has committed an injustice or a crime. God is the protector of whoever honors his commitment to this document, and is God-fearing and so is Muhammad, the Messenger of God. (Ibn Hisham)The Constitution of Madinah was a historical document authored and dictated by Prophet Muhammad as the law of a land inhabited by different ethnic groups and nationalities. The document secured and promoted cooperation and fraternity among all people of any creed, color, ethnicity, and lineage, and set down the criterion of righteousness as the base of distinction.

A Human Soul In addition to the legislation that the Prophet laid down in Madinah, he also practiced the spirit of acceptance and respect for those who were different in his daily life. The Prophet used to visit the sick people among the Jews as well as the Muslims; and when on one occasion the funeral procession of a Jew passed before him, he stood up as a sign of respect for the deceased. “Why did you stand up for a Jewish funeral?” he was asked. The Prophet replied: “Is it not a human soul?” (Al-Bukhari)In this age of racial profiling and targeted killings directed at Muslims this attitude of the Prophet may sound other-worldly.

www.islamonline.net


Iraqi infant mortality soars by 150 percent—a damning revelation of US war crimes

May 11, 2007

The infant mortality rate in Iraq has increased by a shocking 150 percent since 1990—the highest such increase recorded for any country in the world—according to an annual report issued by the child advocacy group, Save the Children.

According to the report, in 2005, the last year for which reliable data is available, one in eight Iraqi children—122,000 in all—died before reaching their fifth birthday. More than half of these deaths were recorded among new-born infants, with pneumonia and diarrhea claiming the greatest toll among Iraqi babies.

The infant mortality rate has long been considered one of the key measures of societal progress and wellbeing. The astounding figures recorded in Iraq are an accurate reflection of the social devastation wrought both by the US invasion of 2003 and more than a decade of US-backed economic sanctions that preceded it.

“Conservative estimates place increases in infant mortality following the 2003 invasion of Iraq at 37 percent,” according to the Save the Children report. The implications of such a change—in the space of just two years—are staggering. Given the steady escalation of the armed conflict in Iraq and the continued deterioration of social conditions for masses of people in the country, the rate of increase in infant and child deaths was no doubt even greater over the course of 2006.

The report blamed the horrific decline in infant and child health since the invasion on the steadily worsening living conditions for the Iraqi population as a whole, including “electricity shortages, insufficient clean water, deteriorating health services and soaring inflation.”

This overall destruction of basic social infrastructure unleashed by the US invasion and occupation has been translated into a horrendous decline in child health. “Only 35 percent of Iraqi children are fully immunized, and more than one-fifth (21 percent) are severely or moderately stunted” as a result of malnutrition, the study found.

The statistics compiled by Save the Children indicate that in 1990 the mortality rate for children under five in Iraq stood at 50 for every 1,000 live births—among the best outcomes reported for the entire Arab world at the time. In 2005, the figure was 125 per 1,000 live births—roughly equivalent to the figures recorded in countries like Malawi, Mauritania, Uganda and Haiti.

While some countries—all with one exception in Africa—have higher death rates than Iraq, none came even near the rate of increase in infant mortality recorded by the US-occupied country (Botswana came closest, with a 107 percent rise, while still recording a slightly lower rate of 120 deaths per 1,000 live births).

The destruction of the conditions and very lives of Iraqi children began well before US troops invaded the country in 2003. The 1990-1991 Gulf War saw more than 90,000 tons of US bombs and missiles dropped on Iraq, smashing much of its essential infrastructure, including power plants and water and sanitation systems and creating the conditions for a public health disaster.

The war was followed by a decade of punishing sanctions that deprived Iraqi children and the population as a whole of essential medical supplies and adequate nutrition. Even chlorine, needed to purify water, was embargoed, depriving infants and small children of a clean water supply and condemning many to death.

US-backed sanctions killed 500,000 Iraqi childrenIt was during this period that the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) estimated that an additional half a million Iraqi children had died between 1991 and 1998 as a result of the sanctions.

In 1998, the coordinator of United Nation humanitarian operations in Iraq, Denis Halliday, resigned in protest calling the sanctions a form of “genocide” and “a deliberate policy to destroy the people of Iraq.” Halliday said at the time, “We are in the process of destroying an entire society. It is as simple and terrifying as that. It is illegal and immoral.”

President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, confronted in a television interview with the UN estimate of 500,000 children having died as a result of the US-backed sanctions, famously answered, “We think the price is worth it.”

The rise in infant mortality rates represents the starkest manifestation of the murderous impact that US aggression upon Iraq and its children over a protracted period. But there are many other indications that for those who survive, conditions of life have become increasingly unbearable.

According to figures reported by the Iraqi government, some 900,000 children have been left orphans by the carnage that has swept Iraq since the US invasion of 2003. It is estimated that at the present levels of violence, some 400 children are left orphaned every day in the country.

The Iraqi Ministry of Education, meanwhile, estimates that barely 30 percent the country’s 3.5 million elementary school children are attending classes, a sharp decline from 75 percent last year. A study sponsored by the World Health Organization in the Iraqi city of Mosul, found fully 30 percent of school children surveyed suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder.

Significantly, the other country that is presently occupied by the US military and remains the scene of a bitter counterinsurgency war—Afghanistan—ranks as the second worst in the world in terms of its infant mortality rate, with 257 deaths for every 1,000 live births. In other words, more than one out of four Afghan children dies before the age of five. On average, every Afghan mother sees two of her children die as infants, while one in six women die in childbirth.

According to the Save the Children study, 40 percent of Afghan children are malnourished and less than half have access to safe water. The report also notes that, while “1 child in 100,000 in the United States dies of pneumonia each year, roughly 1 in 15” dies of the disease in Afghanistan.

On a world scale, Save the Children reports, “Every year, more than 10 million children die before they reach the age of 5, most from preventable causes and almost all in poor countries.” It adds that while infant global infant mortality rates had improved in previous decades, “rates of progress are slowing and in many countries, child death rates are getting worse.”

The organization insists that available and low-cost solutions could easily prevent 6 million of these deaths annually. These include, “skilled care at childbirth, breastfeeding, measles immunization, oral rehydration therapy for diarrhea and medical care for pneumonia.” But for many of the most impoverished countries, and for many others in the most oppressed layers of society elsewhere, these elementary forms of health care and education are not provided.

The statistics included in the report also indicate that the problems of infant mortality reflect the worldwide growth of social inequality, which is literally killing millions of children every year.

“A child in the poorest fifth of a population is more than twice as likely to die compared to a child from the richest fifth,” the study finds. “Eliminating health-care inequities—and bringing mortality rates among the poorest 80 percent of the population down to those prevailing among the richest 20 percent—would prevent about 4 million of the 10 million deaths each year.”

In addition to the growing impact of social inequality within each country, the gap between the wealthiest and most impoverished countries has also continued to widen. While in 1990, the child mortality rate for sub-Saharan Africa was 20 times higher than for the industrialized countries, by 2005, the rate was 28 times as high, the study said.

The above article was sent to me via email from:

www.islamservices.org


Jewish Religion, Jewish History-The Weight of 3,000 Years

May 11, 2007

By Israel Shahak, with a foreword by Gore Vidal. Published by Pluto Press (London, 1994).
Bookreview
When the Roman historian Tacitus pointed out 19 centuries ago that the Jews are unique among the peoples of the world in their intense hatred and contempt for all peoples but their own, he was only repeating what many other scholars had discovered before him. For the next 1,900 years other investigators came to similar conclusions, either from a study of the Jews’ religious writings or from a study of the Jews’ behavior toward non-Jews.

Notable among these was the reformer, Martin Luther, who in 1543 wrote in “Von den Juden und Ihren Lugen”:

“Does not their Talmud say, and do not their rabbis write, that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob, as they do with their usury, from a heathen is a divine service. For they hold that they cannot be too hard on us nor sin against us, because they are of the noble blood and circumcised saints; we, however, are cursed goyim. And they are the masters of the world, and we are their servants, yea, their cattle…
“Should someone think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much, but much too little. For I see in their writings how they curse us goyim and wish us all evil in their schools and their prayers.”

The Jews responded to Luther like they responded to all the others. They put him down as just another “hater,” blinded by religious bigotry. And today that’s still the Jews’ standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about them except the most fawning praise.

When British newsman William Cash, Los Angeles correspondent for London’s Daily Telegraph, reported late last year in a magazine article the simple fact that the executives in Hollywood’s motion picture industry are nearly all Jews, they shrieked at him, “Hater!” and denied his fact. When famous actor Marlon Brando later repeated the same fact, he was as well attacked for being an “anti-Semite”.

Thus, Israel Shahak’s book “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3,000 Years” is all the more important for being a document by a aknowledgeable Jew — a Jewish “insider” — about the beliefs and behavior of his fellow Jews. Born in Warsaw in 1933, Shahak spent a portion of his childhood in the concentration camp in Belsen, from which he immigrated to Palestine in 1945. He grew up in Israel, served in the Israeli military, and became a chemistry professor. Like all Israelis, he became fluent in Hebrew. He also became acclimated to the peculiar moral atmosphere of Israeli society: a combination of overweening arrogance and deceit, a mixture of pugnacious self-righteousness and duplicity.

Unlike his fellow Israelis, however, Professor Shahak is deeply troubled by this peculiar atmosphere. Whereas the Jews around him take it for granted that the goyim on whom they depend for economic, military, and diplomatic support are too stupid ever to figure out what the Jews think about them and say about them behind their backs and plan to do to them when they can, and too sheeplike ever to take effective action if they do figure it out, he worries. He remembers that the Romans figured it out, and they consequently sacked Jerusalem and ended their cult in Palestine. He remembers that the Germans figured it out, and that’s why he became an involuntary tenant in a concentration camp. He’s worried that if his fellow Jews continue behaving as they always have, they will get themselves into some really serious trouble — again.

In particular, Professor Shahak is concerned about the behavior of those of his people who adhere to “Judaism”. He is not one of these himself, and so he is able to look with some degree of objectivity at the mixture of superstition, Jewish chauvinism, and hatred of non-Jews which makes up the Jewish religion and its sacred writings. He deplores traditional Jewish teachings, not only because of the danger that some new Martin Luther will come along and spill the beans to the Gentiles, but because of the spiritually debilitating effect these teachings have had on the Jews themselves. Of the world of medieval Jewry in Europe, the world of the ghetto and the shtetl which modern Jewish writers refer to in euphoric tones as a world of quaint tradition and piety, Shahak says: “It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance …”

He cites a number of specific instances of the ways in which Jewish religious authorities have kept their flocks under control. In general, the rabbis have taught their fellow Jews that their Gentile neighbors are spiritually and morally unclean; that they are subhuman, on a level with the beasts of the field; and that they hate Jews and must be hated in return. Jews are taught that the Christian religion is a religion fit only for animals, and that its founder, Jesus, was the son of a prostitute and is presently immersed in a pit of boiling excrement in hell.

Among the Hassidim (Hebrew for “pious ones”) all of these teachings are kept current. Shahak points out that a central thesis of the Hassidic doctrine is that only Jews are human beings, and that the universe was created for them alone. Non-Jews were created only to be used by Jews. Although this teaching about the subhumanity of Gentiles is most open and explicit among the bearded, sidelocked, black-hatted Orthodox Jews that one sees in Jewish strongholds such as New York City, it comes from the core of Jewish tradition and is accepted to a greater or lesser degree by all pious Jews. It is, for example, a specific tenet of the Jewish Defense League and is cited in the membership handbook for that group.

Especially frustrating to Professor Shahak is the clever deception which his fellow Jews use to conceal the true nature of Judaism from their Gentile neighbors. Regarding the veil of false piety which conceals from Gentile eyes the malevolent doctrine of the Hassidim, he writes: “A chief deceiver in this case, and a good example of the power of deception, was Martin Buber. His numerous works eulogizing the whole Hassidic movement (including Habbad) never so much as hint at the real doctrines of Hassidism concerning non-Jews.” Buber (1878-1965) promoted Hassidism in Germany during the rise of the National Socialists — in fact, until 1938, when he left for Palestine — and Shahak considers Buber’s efforts, despite their deceptiveness, at least partly responsible for the National Socialist reaction to the Jews.

Another example of Jewish deception given by Professor Shahak concerns the etymology of the Yiddish word for a Gentile girl, shiksa. He cites the popular English-language book “The Joys of Yiddish” (New York, 1968), by Leo Rosten, which tells its readers that shiksa comes from the Hebrew word sheqetz, meaning “blemish”. Writes Shahak, “This is a barefaced lie, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines sheqetz as follows: ‘unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination…’ “

Professor Shahak writes with passion. He evidently feels that liberating Jews everywhere from the shackles of their misanthropic superstitions and freeing Israeli state policy in particular from the stifling influence of Judaism is a matter of some urgency. He focuses our attention especially on the inherent hatefulness of Judaism with citations from a number of Jewish religious writings.

In a chapter titled “The Laws against Non-Jews,” he writes:

“…[T]he Halakhah, that is the legal system of classical Judaism — as practiced by practically all Jews from the 9th century to the end of the 18th and as maintained to this very day in the form of Orthodox Judaism — is based primarily on the Babylonian Talmud. However, because of the unwieldy complexity of the legal disputations recorded in the Talmud, more manageable codifications of talmudic law became necessary … The most authoritative code, widely used to date as a handbook, is the Shulhan ‘Arukh…”
He then cites the teaching of this code regarding homicide:

“According to the Jewish religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew … When the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all.
“Thus, one of the two most important commentators on the Shulhan ‘Arukh explains that when it comes to a Gentile, “one must not lift one’s hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice … there is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly.” …

“A Gentile murderer who happens to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism, he is not punished.”

Then Shahak gives us a rabbi’s answer to an Israeli soldier who has asked whether or not it is proper to kill Arab women and children. In his answer the rabbi quotes from the Talmud: “The best of the Gentiles — kill him; the best of snakes — dash out its brains.”

Perhaps even more offensive are the Jewish beliefs on sexual matters. Shahak writes:

“Sexual intercourse between a married Jewish woman and any man other than her husband is a capital offense for both parties, and one of the three most heinous sins. The status of Gentile women is very different. The Halakhah presumes all Gentiles to be utterly promiscuous and the verse “whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue [of semen] is like the issue of horses” is applied to them… Therefore, the concept of adultery does not apply to intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman; rather the Talmud equates such intercourse to the sin of bestiality…
“According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia: “He who has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to the death penalty, for it is written: ‘thy fellow’s wife’ rather than the alien’s wife … and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the Gentiles, in any case a Jew is exempted.”

“This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted — quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew: “If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day — because he had willful coitus with her she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.”"

The Talmud’s overriding concern with matters of money and property mirror that of the Jews, and Professor Shahak offers a number of hair-splitting examples of Jewish beliefs on the subject and the way in which distinctions are made between the property of Jews and Gentiles, and between Jewish dealings with another Jew and with a Gentile. Two of these examples will suffice here:

“If a Jew finds property whose probable owner is Jewish, the finder is strictly enjoined to make a positive effort to return his find by advertising it publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and all the early rabbinical authorities not only allow a Jewish finder to appropriate an article lost by a Gentile, but actually forbid him or her to return it…
“It is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling or buying at an unreasonable price. However, “Fraud does not apply to Gentiles, for it is written: ‘Do not defraud each man his brother’…”"

Shahak points out that “the Halakhah interprets all such idioms [as 'each man his brother' or 'neighbor'] as referring exclusively to one’s fellow Jew.”

How have the Jews managed to keep teachings of this sort concealed from the Gentiles among whom they live? The truth of the matter is that they have not always been able to do so. Luther was not the only Christian scholar who learned Hebrew, peered into the Talmud, and was horrified by what he saw. Sometimes the Jews were able to bribe the Christian authorities to overlook such things, but throughout the later Middle Ages there were prohibitions and burnings of talmudic literature by outraged popes and bishops. The Jews developed a clever system of double bookkeeping to circumvent such “persecution”. They modified or deleted the offending passages from new editions of the Talmud, and they made up a separate compendium — Talmudic Omissions, or in Hebrew Hesronot Shas — which circulated surreptitiously among the rabbis. In Israel today, feeling cocky enough to dispense with most such deceptions, the Jews are putting the passages which formerly had been omitted or modified back into the latest editions of the Talmud or the Shulhan ‘Arukh in their original form. They are still careful with translations into Gentile tongues, however. Professor Shahak gives an example:

“In 1962 a part of the Maimonidean Code … the so-called Book of Knowledge, which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: “It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands.” In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: “It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them.” But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of “infidels”who must be exterminated: “Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoqand Baitos [the founders of the Sadducean sect] and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot.” Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.”
Israel Shahak is a rare Jew indeed, and his book is essential reading for anyone interested in the problem of the Jews.

awakenedgoyim

Thank you, www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com


Video of Pedophile Rabbi “Wiped Off YouTube”

May 11, 2007

I published in April 23, 2007, a post about David Kaye, the rabbi who sought to have anal sex with a boy. The post included a video of that filthy rabbi but guess what? After checking that video out by mere chance, I found out that they deleted the video from YouTube. When I clicked on the video link, I got this message instead:

“This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.”

Of course Zionists are behind this. They are embarrassed. They don`t want anyone to see their dirty laundry. But you know what? They won`t conceal it for actually most of their rabbis are into that kind of sexual aberration.

Have a look at my previously published post about that person which includes the link to that deleted video,

http://ahmedismailibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/04/23/rabbi-caught-red-handed-in-pedophile-sting/


Former Powell aide says Bush, Cheney guilty of ‘high crimes’

May 11, 2007

A former top State Department aide to Colin Powell said today that President Bush and Vice President Cheney are more deserving of impeachment than was Bill Clinton.Lawrence Wilkerson, who was chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, said on the public radio program On Point Thursday that “Bill Clinton’s peccadilloes … pale in significance” when compared to the “high crimes and misdemeanors” of Bush and Cheney.

Wilkerson did not directly call on Congress to begin impeachment hearings, and he brought up impeachment in response to a caller’s question. Early in the show, however, he observed, “This administration doesn’t know how to effect accountability, in my opinion.”

Wilkerson’s comments were first reported by pro-impeachment Web site AfterDowningStreet.org.

“The language in [the Constitution] about impeachment is nice and precise -– it’s high crimes and misdemeanors,” he said. “You compare Bill Clinton’s peccadilloes for which he was impeached to George Bush’s high crimes and misdemeanors or Dick Cheney’s high crimes and misdemeanors, and I think they pale in significance.”

Taking a historical view of impeachment, Wilkerson said he believed the Founding Fathers would be surprised that more presidents had not been impeached.

“I do believe that they would have thought had they been asked by you or whomever at the time of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia ‘Do you think this will be exercised?’ they would have said ‘Of course it will, every generation they’ll have to throw some bastard out.’”Wilkerson said. “That’s a form of accountability too. It’s ultimate accountability.”

Asked about the high crimes of the current administration, Wilkerson said the American public was duped into supporting a war in Iraq.

“I think we went into this war for specious reasons,” he said. “I think we went into this war not too much unlike the way we went into the Spanish American War with the Hearst press essentially goading the American people and the leadership into war. That was a different time in a different culture, in a different America. We’re in a very different place today and I think we essentially got goaded into the war through some of the same means.”

Source: TheRawStory.com


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.