Tuesday, August 2, 2005

Hello Muddah, Hello Faddah

Hamas, like any benevolent organization might, runs summer camps for children:

"The main reason for Hamas summer camp is just for fun, to take them from the killing environment. They've gone through things they weren't prepared for," Salah, the Hamas education chief, said. "The main thing is to teach them to love their nation, Palestine. We're all one nation." But while Hamas leaders point to their social programs as the reason for the camps' popularity, Israelis -- and some Palestinians -- are far more critical of what the young campers are learning besides horseback riding and the backstroke.

At one beach camp, attended by approximately 100 kids, an instructor wore a heavy flannel shirt under which a webbed belt could be seen strapped to his stomach. Asked by a reporter what it was, he answered, with a broad smile, "Boom!"

The instructor led a group of young teenagers through marching drills on the sand -- facing movements, close quarter drill. With a smile at the reporter, he put a megaphone to his lips.

"What are you?" he called.

"Monsters!" the kids replied.

"What are you?!"


As the instructor, Sa'eb Dormush, stepped aside for an interview, a youth in the group shouted out "moqawama!" -- resistance. "That is the first word they learn when they are born," Dormush said with a laugh. "This is the next generation."

Across camp, a group of younger children -- most between 10 and 12 -- sat in a circle in the sand singing one of the "intifada songs" they learn at camp. One boy sang verses in a rolling soprano as the others joined in on the one-word chorus.

"We don't want to sleep.


We want revenge.


Raise it up.


Rifle fire.


If it will take a thousand martyrs.


Kill Zionists.


Wherever they are.


In the name of God.


Of course, the curmudgeonly Israelis fail to appreciate the benefits being bestowed on the little tykes:

Such activities prompt Israeli officials to look harshly at the camps, especially when combined with statements from Hamas officials such as Gaza leader Mahmoud al-Zahar, who said in a recent interview that despite the current shaky hudna (truce) with Israel, Hamas will continue to attack Jewish settlements in the West Bank until Israel disengages from that area. He also said that he remains devoted to the elimination of the state of Israel altogether.

"These summer camps are an industry of a culture of hatred," said Gissin, Sharon's spokesman. "They don't teach them how to fly kites; they teach them how to become walking bombs."

What a slander. To think that the Zionists would sink so low as to accuse peace-loving Palestinians of being so depraved that they would actually encourage their children to become suicidal killers. No wonder there's no peace in the Middle-East.

Is Islam the Problem?

"If the Boy Scouts of America had 1,000 Scout troops, and 10 of them practiced suicide bombings, then the BSA would be considered a terrorist organization. If the BSA refused to kick out those 10 troops, that would make the case even stronger. If people defending terror repeatedly turned to the Boy Scout handbook and found language that justified and defended murder -- and the scoutmasters responded by saying 'Could be' -- the Boy Scouts would have been driven out of America long ago."

"Today, Islam has whole sects and huge mosques that preach terror. Its theology is openly used to give the murderers their motives. Millions of its members give these killers comfort. The question isn't how dare I call Islam a terrorist organization, but rather why more people do not."

Talk show host Michael Graham who was suspended by WMAL for repeatedly accusing Islam of being a terrorist organization.

See more here.

As if to affirm Graham's allegation that the problem is not just fringe Islamists but Islam itself even some so-called moderate imams are refusing to face reality. The most senior Islamic cleric in Birmingham claimed recently that Muslims were being unjustly blamed in the war on terrorism and that the eight suspects in the two bombing attacks on London "could have been innocent passengers":

Mohammad Naseem, the chairman of the city's central mosque, called Tony Blair a "liar" and "unreliable witness" and questioned whether CCTV footage issued of the suspected bombers was of the perpetrators.

Mr Naseem, who was speaking after police seized Yasin Hassan Omar in Birmingham, delivered his unprompted outburst when he was invited to a press conference with West Midlands police and Birmingham city council to help calm fears of racial or religious tension after the arrest.

His comments shocked senior police officers. Sources said that attempts to encourage Muslims to pass them information on the bombers' activities would be hindered. One said: "We are trying to gain the trust of the Muslim community and these kinds of comments have the opposite effect. All they do is encourage communities to close ranks against us."

To the obvious embarrassment of council officials and police standing next to him, Mr Naseem said the Government and security services "were not to be relied upon". He said: "Tony Blair has told lies on going to Iraq and in a court of law if a witness has proved to be a liar he ceases to be a reliable witness. So we cannot give our blind trust to the Government.

"To have that trust it is important that the process of law should be independent, open and transparent. I am also sad that unfortunately the impression has been given that Muslims are to be targeted in this war against terror. There seems to be a directive to target Muslims. Why do we not have an open mind about this?

"Muslim bashing seems to be more earnest than the need for national unity and harmony. Terrorists can be anybody - we will have to see [whether the bombers are Muslims]. The process is not open; the process is not transparent; the process is not independent. I do not have faith in the system as it stands."

Mr Naseem is one of the most respected Muslims in the city and is considered a moderate. He has regular meetings with the chief constable to discuss religious harmony. Mr Naseem said that while it was vital that terrorism was stamped out and that there was never any justification for it, the Government had not helped by going to war in Iraq.

Dismissing the Prime Minister's insistence that the war had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks, he said: "Tony Blair ... is not going to be perceived as a reliable witness. His comments could motivate someone to take the law into his own hands."

"Some people have been caught but I have not seen any evidence. The process of law is not open," he added. Asked about the suspects' DNA being found at the scene of the first attacks, he said: "DNA can match you, but that does not mean you are going to commit a crime. Thousands of youths are passing by and caught on CCTV, so how do you know it is them?"

And, in an editorial in The Dawn, the central mosque's newsletter, Mr Naseem writes: "Where is the evidence that four youths whose pictures were caught on CCTV cameras...were the perpetrators? How did we reject the possibility they were just innocent victims of this terrible happening? They had bought return train tickets."

Meanwhile, the imam at one of the largest east coast mosques, a supporter of Hamas, Shaker Elsayed, rejected any suggestion that Islam needs to reform and should use any means necessary to defeat its enemies.

Islamists like Elsayad and Naseem see world-wide Islam as within their grasp as long as they don't lose heart and do not allow themselves to be deterred from the goal. Thus they must not give an inch to the infidels no matter how stupid their obstinence makes them sound.

The Privileged Professor

How does the University of Rhode Island justify paying this guy? Forget about the fact that, if Mr. Nelson is telling the story accurately, he's a disgrace to the teaching profession. Forget that he's an incredibly sleazy and contemptible human being. Ask yourself what the university would do if he were a heterosexual male making similar remarks to female students. Change everything in this column so that the references were to heterosexual behavior by a heterosexual male and the university would have had his bags packed and desk cleaned out within an hour of the opening of classes whether a student filed a formal complaint or not.

Why are promiscuously homosexual professors so privileged at this school that they are permitted to violate the canons of professional ethics governing teacher-student relationships and defraud their students of an education and still get paid for it? We know what kind of man professor Vocino is, but what kind of place is the University of Rhode Island? It sounds like an academic sewer.