Jewish Russian Telegraph

Boston Globe: Mosque lawsuit dismissal is sought

Boston Globe reports:

Declining donations have stalled construction of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center. Scheduled to open in 2004, the Roxbury mosque is still far from completion. (Pat Greenhouse/ Globe Staff/ File 2005)

Mosque lawsuit dismissal is sought

Project dissenters deny conspiracy

By Stephen Kurkjian, Globe Staff  |  December 29, 2005

A lawyer, citing a state law that encourages open debate about development projects, is seeking dismissal of a suit that claims his clients conspired to stop construction of a large mosque and cultural center in Roxbury.

Boston lawyer Jeffrey S. Robbins declared in motions filed last Friday in Suffolk Superior Court that his clients had not made any false or defamatory statements about the Islamic Society of Boston, which is developing the $24.5 million project in Roxbury Crossing, or its leaders.

Also, Robbins, who represents a handful of the groups and individuals named in the suit, stated in his motions that whatever statements they had made were protected by a 1994 law -- the Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation statute (known by its acronym SLAPP) -- which the Legislature approved to prevent major developers from suing dissenters to silence their opposition to projects.

In October, the Islamic Society filed a lawsuit against 16 individuals and entities, including the Boston Herald and Fox Television's Channel 25, alleging they had conspired to publish and broadcast false and defamatory information about mosque leaders in part to halt development of the project. Planned as the largest mosque in New England, the development, scheduled to open in November 2004, is still far from completion as donations have slowed to a trickle. The case expanded suits the society filed last February.

Robbins acknowledged that his clients had participated in research that revealed that some of the Islamic Society officials had made extremist statements in the past.

But he said his clients were covered by the law, which protects all written or oral statements made while petitioning public agencies to review a development project or when enlisting the public's participation to seek such a review.

''My clients were clearly engaged in speech and activity that is protected by the SLAPP statute," Robbins said yesterday. ''At every step of the way, they have been petitioning public officials and the public at large about their concerns with this project."

For example, Robbins said, Charles Jacobs, the president of the David Project, a Boston-based research group, met with Governor Mitt Romney in September to express his dismay about the development of the project. The David Project is one of the lawyer's clients.

But Eric Fehrnstrom, director of communications for the Romney administration, said that while Romney and Jacobs greeted one another in the governor's office that day, Jacobs spent most of the time discussing his concerns with Beth Myers, Romney's chief of staff.

David H. Rich, who represents the Islamic Society of Boston and its two top leaders, said he did not believe that Robbins's clients qualified for legal protection under the 1994 statute.

He cited a Sept. 2004 e-mail by Anna Kolodner, education director for the David Project, to other defendants.

In the e-mail, Kolodner discussed planning a media campaign and considering a lawsuit that would expose ''the radical fundamentalist underpinnings of the Mosque and its leaders."

''We look forward to arguing our case in court," Rich said.

Some of the ties between mosque leaders and extremist positions that Robbins listed in court filings were:

Abdurahman Alamoudi, one of several men who founded the Islamic Society of Boston in the early 1980s, was cited in a US Treasury Department directive in July for raising about $1 million for two affiliates of the Al Qaeda terrorist organization. In response, the Islamic Society of Boston has stated that Alamoudi has not had any involvement with their organization for at least 15 years and that he had been regarded as a well-respected Muslim-American by the Clinton White House before he was arrested in a plot to kill the Saudi crown prince.

Dr. Walid Fitaihi, a former director and current trustee of the society, wrote an article for an Arabic-language newspaper that called Jews ''murderers of prophets" who should be punished. The society's board chairman apologized for Fitaihi's statements in a letter sent to religious and political leaders and said that the society had reprimanded Fitaihi.

Dr. Yusef al Qaradawi, a scholar and cleric now based in Qatar, was listed as one of the society's seven trustees in its filings with the Internal Revenue Service in 1998, 1999, and 2000 even though he had been barred by President Clinton in 2000 from entering the United States because of statements in support of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah. The Islamic Society of Boston attributed Qaradawi's listing as a trustee as an ''administrative oversight," but the society's board chairman said he had sought the cleric's appearance on a video at a 2002 fund-raiser.

Stephen Kurkjian can be contacted at kurkjian@globe.com. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Learning the Art of Jihad at Camp Cedarkirk in Florida

Meet Camp Cedarkirk in Florida. The camp is designed for youth oriented events promoting peace, love, faith, and friendship. The camp is owned by the Presbyterian Church USA. The church is a very confused place when it comes to love and friendship. Their love has limitations. For example, they don't love Israel and support divestment from her. We don't know of any other country they want to divest from.

But they have friends too. For example, they are friends with Hizbullah -- they have on their payroll Dr. Nuhad Tomeh, a full-scale ambassador to Hizbullah.
Where does camp Cedarkirk comes into a play? Read on.
It turns out that Presbyterian Church USA loves Jihad. And they decided to host it at Cedarkirk. Here is a report from FrontPage Magazine:

A New Year’s Jihad Retreat   
By Joe Kaufman
FrontPageMagazine.com | December 29, 2005

Watching the ball drop, twirling a noisemaker, kissing your sweetheart, and making a resolution that rarely comes to pass -- everyone looks forward to the memory of a new year. But one group will be ringing in the New Year a little differently…through a children’s jihad retreat, with a guest speaker who exalts terrorists and another who is linked to al-Qaeda.

    The majority of Islamic organizations within the United States have, at one time or another, been cited for their connections to terrorism, whether by support of terror groups or through actual terrorist activity carried out by its members. Two of those organizations, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and the Muslim American Society (MAS) have been working together putting on joint conferences. As stated in the New York Daily News (January 30, 2004), the organizations “have held conferences featuring speakers accused of terror ties and have published material supporting suicide bombings against Israel.”

Both ICNA and MAS stress the need for providing forums for Muslim youth. ICNA, in order to address this “need,” has created an apparatus called Young Muslims (YM). Likewise, MAS has established its own Youth Division. Through the two groups, children can learn the tenets of radical Islam by attending winter and summer camps.

    Prior to 9/11, the camps would be referred to as “Jihad Camps,” but given the greater meaning of the term (holy war), why attract more attention than what’s necessary? Today, though, while the name has changed, the same radical message is taught. In YM Newsletter Issue 3 (2002/2003), Young Muslims extols the virtues of the works of Osama bin Laden’s mentor, Abdullah Azzam. According to YM Newsletter Issue 4 (2003), one of its goals is to assist in outreach “designed to call people to Islam, strengthen their belief in it, and organize them to work and to wage jihad in its cause.”

    From December 31st of this year through January 2nd, the Tampa chapter of MAS will be launching a new camp, or as they put it, an ‘ILM & TARBIYAH RETREAT. Taking place in Lithia, Florida, at the Cedarkirk Camp & Conference Center, the theme of the event is “A Generation with a Mission.” That title is a little more subdued than the YM August 2002 “Planning for Our Akhira (afterlife),” but make no mistake, the speakers are just as extreme.

    Featured at the “retreat” is the former President of MAS-Chicago, Chantal Carnes. Carnes is well known in the radical Islamist American community; she has given speeches at such venues as ICNA, MAS and Muslim Students Association (MSA) conventions. In addition to being a lecturer, she has also hosted a radio program for the Islamic Broadcasting Network (IBN). Each half-hour program was spent reviewing a different book.   

    On the occasion of July 22, 2003, Carnes and a guest had reviewed the title ‘Imam Shaheed Hassan Al-Banna - From Birth to Martyrdom.’ During the show, she lathered Al-Banna, the founder of the violent Muslim Brotherhood, with praise. She stated, “Every movement I can think of – every organization I can think of – in a way or another, is tracing back to what he started.”  She said he had “inspired” her, and that “His life was captivating.” She said she liked “the fact that he was a shaheed (martyr),” and that she was going to model Al-Banna’s “personal development” with that of her own.   

    According to former federal prosecutor John Loftus, “Al Banna was a devout admirer of Adolph Hitler and wrote to him frequently. So persistent was he in his admiration of the new Nazi Party that in the 1930’s, Al-Banna and the Muslim Brotherhood became a secret arm of Nazi intelligence.”

    Carnes also gushed about the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood started with only four persons.  She exclaimed, “It’s not quantity, it’s quality!”  According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Muslim Brotherhood is a “terrorist group”… “The Brotherhood shares with HAMAS a complete rejection of Western values and Communism and calls for the establishment of a pan-Islamic state founded on the basis of shari'a, or Islamic law… The two movements similarly share the view that Israel is the theological archenemy of Islam… As the precursor of the HAMAS movement, the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza promoted the long-term strategy of creating the foundations of a Muslim state that would eventually become powerful enough to destroy Israel.”

    On another occasion, Carnes and her guest had reviewed a book (‘To Be A European Muslim’) written by the grandson of Hassan Al-Banna, Tariq Ramadan.   She admiringly referred to Ramadan’s writing as being “deep.”  She stated, “He’s actually not that old to be writing about such deep concepts.”  In August of 2004, Ramadan made the news when the Department of Homeland Security barred him from entering the United States by revoking his visa and work permit.  Cited was the Immigration and Naturalization Act, which denies entry to aliens who have used a “position of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity.”

    Chantal Carnes thoughts on Al-Banna and his lineage are nothing new to MAS, for as Daniel Pipes states on his website (in a piece concerning a 2004 paintball event held by MAS-Tampa), “the Muslim American Society is the U.S. face of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

    The other featured speaker for the MAS Retreat is Mazen Mokhtar.  Mokhtar is the Youth Division Head of MAS-New Jersey and the Khateeb (sermon-giver) of Masjid Al-Huda and the Institute of Islamic Studies.  Mokhtar is also associated with the terrorist group Al-Qaeda.

    In August of 2004, shortly before he was to speak at a Young Muslims camp in Pennsylvania (‘A Few Good Men’), the U.S. government accused Mokhtar of assisting Al-Qaeda through the use of a web site he had created.  The web site was www.minna.com, and it was a “mirror site” (replica) of www.azzam.com (Azzam Publications), a site named for Abdullah Azzam that was soliciting funds and recruiting Taliban, Chechen and Al-Qaeda mujaheddin (holy warriors) for terrorist operations overseas.  Mokhtar’s site was to be used as a back-up for Azzam Publications, when Azzam was shut down after the 9/11 attacks, so that fundraising and recruitment could continue.

    On Azzam Publications, in an “APPEAL FOR PROFESSIONAL WEB DESIGNERS,” it is stated, “…we hope inshallah, that Allah would reward you for any time or effort spent in assisting our aspiration of providing an independent media source from the Islamic perspective.”  It seems that Mokhtar answered the appeal.   

    His reward?  A search was conducted on the New Jersey home of Mokhtar, and copies of Azzam Publications sites were found on his computer’s hard drive and files.  These sites were being run by a British citizen named Babar Ahmad, a man thought to have been part of an operation headed by captured Al-Qaeda mastermind, Khalid Sheik Mohammed. 

    On Mokhtar’s Minna site, in the page titled ‘Jihad in Chechnya,’ a video CD depicting terrorist operations was being sold through the website.  On the bottom of the page, it states, “Any enquiries regarding the content of this CD should be directed to the Islamic Army of the Caucasus, to Field Commander Shamil Basayev, Field Commander Khattab or their spokesman Movladi Udogov.”  In September of 2004, Shamil Basayev claimed responsibility for the Beslan school massacre in Russia, which left over 300 dead, mostly children.   
    Acquaintances of Mokhtar’s expressed “surprise” at the notion that he would be affiliated with something such as this -- that his speeches were “mild,” not extreme.  However, when one looks at his past, prior to his involvement with Al-Qaeda, one gets an entirely different picture.    
    On an Internet newsgroup forum, from the years 1992 to 1996, Mazen Mokhtar had made some very disturbing (and somewhat comical) remarks about the terrorist group Hamas and the concept of suicide bombing.  Some of his statements are as follows:

        * “One of the reasons of my support for Hamas is that they have very high moral standards… If their standards were lax, they would have lost my support, and moral standards can't get any more lax than killing those who are innocent.”
        * “Bombing houses is best left to the IDF (IOF?) they are the experts in the field.  Hamas prefers to invest its limited resources in doing good.”
        * “I have read the [Hamas] covenant.  I support the covenant…”
        * “Hamas’s path is the only path in the history of the Palestinian struggle against Israel that has produced results, and the results are impressive, I must say.  I think it is clear that Hamas has the wider vision and the better plan.”
        * “…the operations of HAMAS are heroic.”
        * “In any action of mass self defense, there is the possibility that some innocent people will die… I have enough trust in Hamas to feel that no one is killed before being identified as a collaborator.”
        * “Yes, [suicide bombing is allowed], assuming that the targets are legitimate (and the suicide bombing is a sacrifice, not a suicide.)”
        * “[Blowing yourself up is not considered suicide], because it’s an effective method of attacking the enemy and continuing jihad… These are not people [sic] committing suicide because they are fed up with life, these are people who are sacrificing their lives for Allah.”

    The Muslim American Society of Tampa cannot plead ignorance, with respect to the views of the two featured speakers it is sponsoring at its retreat.  This is the case not just because MAS has associated with these two in the past, but because quite simply, the viewpoint of the organization is identical! 

    On the MAS-Tampa website, one can peruse through an e-library filled with many significant Islamic texts, all written or translated in English.  Included in these works is a text entitled Sahih Bukhari, whose section, ‘Fighting in the Cause of Allah (Jihaad),’ begins with the following:  “I asked Allah's Apostle, ‘O Allah's Apostle! What is the best deed?’  He replied, (1) ‘To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times.’  I asked, ‘What is next in goodness?’  He replied, (2) ‘To be good and dutiful to your parents.’  I further asked, what is next in goodness?’  He replied, (3) ‘To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause.’”   
    Also of relevance on MAS-Tampa’s e-library are a number of discourses, letters and prayers authored by Hassan Al-Banna, himself.  In one of the letters dated 1947, entitled ‘Toward the Light,’ there is contained a foreboding message.  In it, Al-Banna lists a set of political, judicial and administrative goals.  They are:  “(1) An end to party rivalry, and directing the political forces of the nation into a unified front; (2) Amending the law, such that it conforms to all branches of Islamic legislation; and (3) Reinforcing the armed forces, and increasing the number of youth groups; igniting in them the spirit of Islamic jihad.”   
    With all of this in mind, one has to wonder how long it will take the participants in a jihad camp or retreat to accomplish the “deeds” and “goals” set forth in Sahih Bukharih and Al-Banna’s letter. Will they take the time to learn and grow as mature adults, or will they skip right to the third of each (Jihad) and move immediately towards the here-after (Akhira)? [link]

Presbyterians, just as ourselves in the Jewish community, have clueless, self-enamored leftist elite for leaders. But their rank and file are not planning to put up with this insanity. Here is an email exchange between common sense good Americans and their "leaders":

Peace River

Presbytery & Al Qaeda --- Response

Below are email exchanges between the Moderator-elect of Peace River Presbytery (Elaine Barnett [mailto:ewbarnet@tampabay.rr.com]) and a concerned PRP member. I've deleted names to protect the "innocent." The first is the response by the PRP Moderator-elect to an inquiry concerning CedarKirk hosting an Al Qaeda affilidated Muslim group.

To: PRP Member
From: Elaine Barnett
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: Some more info......alittle long but worth the read

Thanks for sending this.

I had a conversation with Deborah Bronkma at Cedarkirk and am convinced that she did her due diligence in checking out this group.

As long as I have been in this area, Cedarkirk has been used by many kinds of groups at times when there is a space. It supplements the camp budget since these groups and organizations pay for the use of the space. They are given clear guidelines as to their behavior while at the center. This particular group offered and sent their curriculum for the retreat for review by the staff. Nothing objectionable was found. John Bronkma will be present at all of the gatherings.

I would invite you to give Deborah a call at Cedarkirk and get the straight scoop from someone who has really done some checking with a variety of sources about this. Elaine

From: PRP Member
To: Elaine Barnett
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 3:11 PM
Subject: RE: Some more info......alittle long but worth the read

I appreciate your response, but I disagree with you. But we have a right to disagree. Thank you again for your attention.
PRP Member

From: Elaine Barnett
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 3:50 PM
To: PRP Member
Subject: Re: Some more info......alittle long but worth the read

Conversation is always good especially in times of disagreement. According to my presbytery handbook/directory Kim Johnson from your church is a member of the Cedarkirk Board. She is in her first term on that board and 2005 was her first year. She might also be able to shed some light on their policies for outside groups.

I too wouldn't argue that disagreeing is ok but how could we possible disagree that we shouldn't allow the use of our facilities by a group affiliated with Al Qaeda?

Permalink • Leave a comment • Trackback (0)

03:56:39 pm, Categories: Commentary  

Breaking News

PRESBYTERIAN CAMPGROUNDS TO HOST JIHAD RETREAT WITH TIES TO AL-QAEDA

Dear Presbyterians in Peace River and

Tampa

Bay

Presbyteries:

I have received many responses regarding the Muslim American Society meeting at Cedarkirk. This meeting caught all of us by surprise, including it being on Fox News this afternoon. To my knowledge it had not been discussed nor approved by either the

Peace River

or Tampa Bay Presbyteries.

Therefore, in light of the issues presented in Joe Kaufman’s “A New Year’s Jihad Retreat”, as Presbyterians we need to demand that the Tampa Bay and Peace River Presbytery leadership immediately cancel this Muslim meeting at Cedarkirk until such time as each of our respective presbyteries have had an opportunity to fully understand the mission of the Muslim American Society.

Here are the email and telephone numbers for the executive presbyters of

Peace River

and Tampa Bay Presbytery. If you agree this meeting should be immediately cancelled, then forward this email to the EP’s to let them know you want them to take such action. Please follow your email with a phonecall to them on Friday morning.

Peace River

Presbytery
Graham Hart, General Presbyter
(941) 426-8421 ext. 304
(800) 736-4488
graham@peaceriverpresbytery.org

Tampa

Bay

Presbytery
Gerry Tyer, Executive Presbyter
(727) 466-0500
gtyer@pbty.com

“A New Year’s Jihad Retreat” is located here

Larry Rued
Elder
First Presbyterian Church

Bradenton,

FL

Posted by: jrtelegraph

Michael Medved on Munich in 159 Words

Here is a clear and concise assessment of "Munich" from Michael Medved, a nationally syndicated radio-talk show host and a very respected movie critic:

It's been 45 years since Hollywood released a major motion picture about Israel, so that considerable anticipation surrounded Steven Spielberg's new project about the response to the murder of 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Unfortunately, his skillfully crafted but deeply misleading film, "Munich," spends nearly all its time
showing Palestinians as victims and Israelis as implacable killers --- the terrorist slaughter that inspired the events of the movie is shown only in brief, confusing flashbacks at the very end of the film. The entire theme of the project stresses moral equivalence--- suggesting there's no difference between those who commit terrorism, and those who fight terrorists. While the U.S. and Israel try to defend themselves against suicidal Islamic fanatics, Hollywood shows startling sympathy for our enemies'not only in "Munich," but also in George Clooney's "Syriana," where all the Americans are corrupt and arrogant and the Muslim homicide bombers are totally sympathetic. [link]

Here is Medved's review of the film from his Eye on Entertainment -- listen to audio clip. Here is the verdict:

“Munich” is, nonetheless, chilling and captivating to watch and full of vivid, complex characterizations but its underlying theme that terrorists and those who try to defeat them are morally equivalent makes it impossible to endorse. Rated R for extremely graphic violence and some nudity and sexuality. 3 STARS for the cinematically brilliant but substantively muddled “Munich”.  [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Leadership by Missing in Action

JCRC should get Gerry on their payroll, or hire him as a consultant. Listening to him might be unpleasant, but the truth rarely is.

JCRC’s Missing-in-Action Center

JCRC has taken so much flack for advertising Spielberg’s “Munich” that they are taking a new tack in defending their promotion.  I love how nimble these folks at 126 High Street have become.  Smarter?  Not yet.  I get the feeling that they now have these snap conferences when the proverbial excrement hits the fan.  In the past it would take them a couple of weeks to respond.  Now with all positions filled, they have become more adept at response.  That is not to say that they don’t still screw up royally.

The latest explanation to the Munich promotion fiasco is that JCRC is in the business of urging people to decide for themselves.  They tell us: see the movie and decide for yourself.  They are even sending out one pro-Munich and one anti-Munich review.  How helpful and even-handed!  They are seemingly pro-choice in everything.  You decide.  We will not tell you what to do.  We encourage you to get all the information so you can to make the best possible decision.  Doesn’t that sound great? 

Let us examine how this would work in another setting.  You hear there is a white power rally at Copley Square, you go to your Rabbi, he says some people like them, and others don’t, and you decide, check it out.  Or how about this, at school some kids are taking drugs.  Your kid goes to the guidance counselor.  The counselor says, how do you know if you have not tried?  Check it out.

You say these examples are absurd?  Not really.  What they all have in common is that the person in the role of leadership abdicates their responsibility to guide and influence.  That is JCRC’s story.

David Broder writes that, in the movie “as assassination piles upon assassination, Avner (the main character) descends into a pit of Raskolnikovian hell. Israelis kill Palestinians and Palestinians kill Israelis and guilt piles upon paranoia. Eventually, Avner loses faith in his mission, in Zionism, in Israel itself.” 

So here is JCRC’s Israel Action Center promoting a film in which the protagonist “loses faith in Israel”.  Wow!

Spielberg concluded "The only thing that's going to solve this is rational minds, a lot of sitting down and talking until you're blue in the gills."  JCRC can sign on to this.  The biggest complain they heard in Somerville was that if the Divestment proposal did not get on the ballot there would be less chance to have a citywide debate.  Believe you me; JCRC was really torn on that one. 

You have to understand a couple of basic and shameful truths.  We are talking about leftist Jews who love the left and are uncomfortable defending Israel, unless of course, Israel does something like fold its tent and disappear, like in Gaza.

They still love the old fool, Shimon Peres.  They say so in public.  JCRC thinks Spielberg has a great truth to tell.  Negotiate with the killers.  How can that possibly hurt? 
JCRC’s coalition people said just that, when speaking against divestment at Somerville’s City Hall, can’t we discuss this?  The other side had no response.  They viewed these coalition types with thinly veiled contempt.  People there said it made them sick.  JCRC really did not have its heart in discouraging divestment. These are the people running our Israel Action Center.  Let us call it what it really is: A Missing-in-Action Center. by Gerry

We live in the hub of the universe, the home of many influential management fads. Most of our readers are old enough to remember the Re-engineering.

Now, it is time for our Jewish leaders to lead the rest of their colleagues across the nation with a new style of leadership, new management fad if you will  -- Leading by Missing in Action. In practical terms it means this:

Disengagement? Good for the Jews. Synagogues are burning? Excellent time to show to the world how serious we are about the separation of Church and State. Refugees from Gaza are going around humiliated, robbed of their property, depressed and hungry? What did they expect? OK, not all of them resisted the deportation. Still, what did they expect? Munich? Decide for yourself! Decide what?
And in Somerville elect people who hate Israel, but don't like divestment for tactical reasons. Oh, yeah where is JCRC on the issue of ISB in this city suing everybody in sight in order to disrupt the normal democratic process?
Hello? No answer. Missing in action.
Probably $1.5 million is not big enough budget. Folks, for this kind of money, we must DEMAND more. Next time they hit you for donation, politely inquiry -- "what have you done for us lately?" Like in the past ten years?

posted by: jrtelegraph

 

Munich: Moral Vision? Moral Evasion!

(Hat tip JRT reader Avi).
This is from Private Papers:

December 27, 2005
Art Needs Moral Vision
Spielberg’s Munich offers only moral evasion.
by Bruce Thornton
Private Papers

Technical or artistic skill cannot compensate for moral confusion. This simple truth about art is as old as Plato, and applies to popular art like the movies as much as it does to high art. No matter how brilliant the technique or artistry, if the moral vision is corrupted or incoherent, the work of art fails and deserves condemnation. Indeed, works that combine such skill with moral corruption are dangerous, for their technical brilliance can tempt the unwary into ignoring or even accepting their moral or ethical shortcomings.

This danger is what makes popular art, especially movies, worthy of attention despite their transience, particularly now, when sophisticated cinematic techniques are as widespread as the moral relativism masquerading as sophisticated insight. Munich, the latest movie from one of Hollywood’s most esteemed directors, illustrates this unholy alliance of cinematic brilliance and moral confusion all too typical of most popular entertainment.

For decades Spielberg has been a master of all the resources and skills that make an entertaining movie. When his theme has been confined to a sentimental morality, such as the requirement that we be nice to children or the weak, or when his subject comes with prepackaged moral certainty approved by the liberal establishment, such as the evils of Nazism or racism, his movies are powerfully entertaining, if thematically somewhat banal. In Munich he addresses a topic, Palestinian Arab terrorism, which cries out for moral clarity; but all Spielberg gives us is the received wisdom unthinkingly repeated by Hollywood and media liberals alike.

This popular take on the Arab-Israeli conflict is encapsulated in the phrase “cycle of violence.” The assumptions behind this phrase comprise a catalogue of modern moral pathologies. Most important is the therapeutic psychology that sees force not in moral terms — that is, as the instrument of a righteous or unrighteous choice and aim — but as a reflexive reaction to grievances and wounds to self-esteem. People who have been insulted, wronged, or denied various aspirations “lash out” in anger, provoking a similar reaction in those whom they attack. Thus the “cycle of violence,” a vicious circle that can be broken only by abandoning force and addressing the grievances that started the cycle in the first place

Notice the implications of this view, one that can be found lurking in every issue from capital punishment to childrearing. Violence is categorically wrong, and for that reason rarely justified. People aren’t violent out of a choice to pursue some aim, but are passive reactors to something outside themselves that makes them suffer. Conflict resolution is thus a form of therapy, requiring understanding and correction of the conditions that really account for violence. All we need to solve our conflicts are sophisticated thinkers who have abandoned the old superstitions of good and evil, and who are sensitive to the feelings and situations of those who commit violent acts — people who see the world not in a simplistic “black and white” but in the nuanced “shades of gray.”

The Palestinian Arab terrorists have been brilliant at exploiting this Western secular superstition, one contradicted by the record of history and the collective wisdom of the human race, both of which teach us that evil men use violence to advance evil ends, and that such unrighteous violence is stopped only by righteous violence. Instead, the Israeli-Arab conflict is interpreted in terms of the “cycle of violence” and its moral equivalence: Jews traumatized by anti-Semitism and the Holocaust drove from their homes Arabs who, in turn traumatized by their suffering and the thwarting of their “nationalist aspirations,” turn to violence, which provokes a response from the Israelis, which creates more suffering, which provokes more violence, and on and on. All we need to do is break the cycle — which usually means getting Israel to stop reacting to Palestinian violence — create a Palestinian state, and the lion will lie down with the lamb. For doesn’t every grammar school teacher know and preach that  “violence solves nothing”?

The “cycle of violence” thesis is attractive to squishy liberals because it doesn’t require a moral judgment. We don’t have to assign blame, which is the cardinal sin for the sensitive, compassionate, superior creatures we fancy ourselves to be. We know, since Freud and Marx and Oprah have told us so, that people don’t choose evil but are driven to it by circumstances beyond their control. So why should we “blame the victim”? Only troglodytes mired in retrograde illusions like good and evil dare to judge who is to blame and deserves retribution for freely chosen acts. And when the terrorist is a non-Western “other” sanctified by multiculturalist victim-politics, the need to avoid judgment is even more pressing.

As soothing to our sensibilities and vanity as this view may be, in the case of the Israeli-Arab conflict it is mere moral idiocy that requires a complete ignorance of the facts of history — the incessant Arab violence against the Jews that started long before the creation of Israel or the so-called “occupation.” For Arabs don’t want to kill Jews and destroy Israel because Jews displaced a subset of Arabs artificially called “Palestinians.” They want to kill Israelis because Israel is the closest, most galling emblem of the unjust ascendancy of the infidel West over Islam, the concrete representation of Islamic dysfunction. Shaped by a tradition and religious culture of divinely sanctioned spiritual superiority and the rightness of Islamic domination over infidels, many Muslims believe they are sanctioned by their faith to reestablish by any means necessary Islamic dominance over a region and people who were once reduced to fearful inferiority.

This jihad waged to reestablish Islamic dominance has been the dynamic of the Arab assaults against Israel. No doubt this or that individual terrorist has had different motives. Some may have been nationalists killing for a secular state, but that motive doesn’t by itself explain Palestinian terrorism, and to reduce terrorism to that one cause is to distort the issue. For if nationalism is the driving force of Palestinian terror, what explains the demand that any Palestinian state be free of Jews, especially when Arabs make up one-sixth of Israel’s population? Why would Arafat have thrown away opportunity after opportunity to achieve a Palestinian state, instead launching more terrorist violence in response to Israeli concessions? Why does a third or more of Palestinian Arabs support Hamas, an organization whose essence is not Palestinian statehood but rather a commitment to the destruction of Israel? Why is the Palestinian national movement pretty much the only one that demands the destruction of a neighbor as a precondition of its own nation’s existence?

And here is where Munich reveals its moral flabbiness, its embodiment of received wisdom that will no doubt earn it plaudits from pundits and critics equally conventional in their thinking, but that compromises the movie’s claim to any sort of true artistic significance. For throughout the film recur speeches and scenes that reduce the conflict to Palestinian lack of a national home and to Israeli reflexive retribution. Terrorists make moving speeches about the loss of their ancestral homeland, but we never hear of the three wars of aggression against Israel, or the equal number of Jews expelled from the lands in which their ancestors had lived for millennia, but who have not used this loss as an excuse to murder innocents. The Israeli agents tracking down the murderers of Israeli athletes in Munich are defined for the most part by their agonizing moral doubts and ambiguities, incessantly reprising the mantra of  “violence begets violence.” The Israeli bomb-maker makes a speech about how killing terrorists somehow compromises Jewish “righteousness,” which suggests that Jews can be righteous and worthy of our sympathy only as long as they remain passive victims, as they are in Schindler’s List.

So too with the movie’s depictions of the terrorists’ “humanity,” as though their evil is somehow mitigated by the fact that they have wives and daughters, or translate literature, or enjoy a nice evening. So what? The Nazis who engineered the Holocaust had children and wives, mothers and fathers. Many of them were probably loving parents and children. Hitler loved Eva Braun and his dog Blondie. He no doubt enjoyed the sunsets from his balcony in Berchtesgaden. Evil can coexist with humane capacities, but that banal fact ultimately has nothing to do with the need to fight against evil. To think otherwise is to indulge a rank sentimentalism that obscures the necessary moral judgment that holds the perpetrators of evil accountable for their acts, and the upholders of the good responsible for using force to stop evil.

In Munich, however, force is viewed with the suspicion typical of the quasi-pacifist liberal. Using force against murderers is futile, the movie keeps telling us, for each dead terrorist is replaced by another one, each killing of a terrorist inspires another act of terrorist retribution. I wonder what would have happened if the same attitude had been taken regarding Nazis or kamikaze pilots. Thank goodness our fathers and grandfathers had more sense. They knew that evil men have to be destroyed, and you stick with the job until the evil men give up or are no more. They knew that evil men choose their evil to advance some aim, and will try to kill you no matter what you do, and are more likely to take heart from a failure to resist than to reconsider their evil aims or to abandon violence. They knew that the sorts of reservations Munich indulges are not signs of a sophisticated sensibility but rather the evasions borne of moral uncertainty, Hamlet-like doubts whose purpose is to avoid action and moral responsibility.

The moral evasions at the heart of Munich evoke another Munich, the Munich of Neville Chamberlain and appeasement, that moment in 1938 when moral exhaustion confronted evil and blinked, unleashing a force of destruction that cost 50 million dead and that was stopped not by understanding of context or empathy with the enemy’s humanity but by righteous force wielded by men who weren’t afraid to call evil by its proper name. Fortunately for Israel, most of its citizens have learned this lesson of history, even as their co-religionist in America indulges the luxury of ignoring it. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Elite Higher Education: Western civilization (NO); "Islamic Studies" (YES).

Leonidas, JRT reader and commenter extraordinnaire, has the following to say about Harvard's and Georgetown's sweet deal with Saudi sugar daddy:

Let me get this straight. 10 years ago a wealthy Yale alumnus offered to donate $20 million dollars to Yale provided the money was spent on a Western Civilization curriculum and Yale turned down the money.

Fast forward to the present: 2 other elite universities eagerly accept $20 million dollars a piece to fund "Islamic Studies". No questions asked, no debate, no general review of the issues involved. To add insult to injury one of the two universities is supposedly in business to support the vision of the Roman Catholic Church!

In sum, this is the message from our supposed centers of elite higher education: Western civilization (NO); "Islamic Studies" (YES).

There's 1 comforting underlying fact in all of this. Our most dangerous enemy is not the one outside our borders who sometimes dares to show his face (Radical Islam). Rather our biggest enemy is our own home-grown cultural Marxism (also known as "secular humanism", "political correctness", "diversity in the community", "progressive activism", "ACLU", etc.). We can put an end to this charade by exposing these institutions and the people behind them for who they are: fifth columnists who will stop at nothing to bring defeat to our nation and culture.

The next time someone tries to "ooh and ahh" you by linking themselves or something to one of these elite universities, remind them of this seditious behavior. Action breeds reaction. [link]

Leonidas adds:

I'd like to qualify something I said in the prior comment. I said that Radical Islam is outside our borders. I guess I should have said that Radical Islam is MOSTLY outside our borders. I haven't had my coffee yet, so I hadn't taken the time to think about Farrakhan, Saudi Petro-Dollars, Prislam, the broken immigration system, the Roxbury Mosque, Al-Fukra, etc.

Don't worry, though, Ted Kennedy's been working very hard since 1965 to bring Radical Islam into this country. Ted's efforts were rewarded on 9-11; his are the gifts that keep on giving.

posted by: jrtelegraph

Exclusive to JRTelegraph: Brian Golden from Brighton to Baghdad and Back

(photo: courtesy of Brian Golden, click to enlarge)
Brian Golden, our former state representative from Brighton, MA, US Army Reserve major and a great friend of the Russian Jewish community of Boston, returned in October after the seven months of active duty in Iraq. Greg Margolin, Editor and Publisher of the Jewish Russian Telegraph talked to Brian.

GM: Brian, it is great to have you back from Iraq. Tell us, what did you do there?
BG: I worked with Army General George W. Casey, also from Allston, on monitoring detention facilities in Iraq. We worked closely with the Red Cross. Currently, we detain around 12,000 people in Iraq, and we have to review cases every six months. Actually, we reviewed cases more often, every three to four months. I had to review about 100 cases per day and make decision whether to release a person or continue detention. It was a very daunting task, and we had to take a long and hard look at each case. I have many more gray hairs after this job, but it has to be done. We would be morally bankrupt if we did not have an objective standard for the decision to release or keep a detainee.
GM: Was it dangerous to be in Iraq?
BG: It was certainly dangerous. It is dangerous for anybody in U.S uniform. It also depends on where you are geographically. Baghdad, North and Central Iraq are dangerous. That's where I spent most of my time. When you are stationary at a base you get mortar fire, small weapon's fire is also thrown at you all the time. Being on the road is also very dangerous. But our teams are very skilled. Drivers are skilled. Now, we know how to use intelligence much better. Whether you live on a base, or travel you are always expose to IED -- improvised explosive devices. You see plumes of smoke on a regular basis. You are also exposed to VBIEDs.
GM: What is a VBIED?
BG: This is a vehicle borne improvised explosive device -- a fancy word for a car bomb. Luckily, most of our 160,000 troops in Iraq are not close enough to these explosions.
GM: Are we winning in Iraq?
BG: A fair assessment, a look at the effort and accomplishment will yield a conclusion that we are winning. Respect to the lives lost in Iraq  demands that we understand what is being purchased with those lives -- lives of Americans, Coalition soldiers, Iraqis. It does not upset me when they show violence in Iraq, but it does upset me when they don't show accomplishments. And every measure of progress in a civil society points to a progress. In 2005, thirty times the number of Iraqis received health care services than during Saddam's times. There is a 300% increase of telecom services, almost all schools are functioning. Electric power and oil production exceed pre-war levels. The economy is rapidly improving, of course, it had nowhere to go but up, but it is improving. Our goal would be to develop Iraqi security forces and police capable of managing the security risks. And we see that more and more responsibilities are borne by the Iraqi forces. It would be good to eliminate violence completely, but that probably  won't happen. It would be good to eliminate violence in Washington, D.C. too. The goal is to hand over the security responsibility to Iraqi soldiers and to return our soldiers home.
GM: What happened to embedded reporters? It looks like the mainstream media is trying to shape everything according to Iraq is Vietnam paradigm.
BG: It's a good question. In the beginning of the war,the media was accused by the left of a pro-war bias. When the war is new, there is excitement.There is a certain enthusiasm, the instinctive reaction to rally. But the real goal is to sustain this level of support long term. With time the adrenaline wears out. There is failure to find WMDs and it all becomes a political blood sport. In the beginning there was interesting media drama in how swiftly and certainly the Baathist regime was swept out of power. With time, other stories became more interesting, and the media started showing violence all the time. I don't begrudge anybody who disagrees with the war, but it would be nice if our accomplishments in Iraq got 10% of the media attention.
GM: Do you think there is a certain element of historical illiteracy on the part of the American public? After all it took a long time to pacify Germany and Japan.
BG: Older generation of Americans remember the Marshall plan that took ten years, and MacArthur  who ran Japan and wrote the constitution which is still in place, and we are still there. I'm not saying that we should stay in Iraq for the next fifty years, I hope that people can step back and see the good that would come out our effort there. All wars are tragic, but I'm proud of the fact that this country stood up against evil regimes. And if the biggest, strongest nation does not stand up to evil the world would be a sad place.
GM:  There is a discussion  about the war in Iraq in the Jewish community. Some people tried to present a view that all of the Jewish community is against it. This is certainly not true, and certainly the majority is the Russian Jewish community is supporting the war effort. How can those of us who support the troops show our support?
BG: You have to write to soldiers, to let them know that you care. Every time people see somebody receiving letters and packages they get excited. This is very tangible. This is a good constructive way to show your support. You can write letters to the Editor. I know, what you, Greg, are doing in the [Jewish Russian] Telegraph, this is a very effective way to counter the prevalent coverage of the print and broadcast media. It is our duty to communicate, especially here, in New England, in Boston, I believe it is my duty to let people know about the real situation.
GM: Brian, this is probably a very American question -- would you do it again? A few years ago, my daughter had to interview veterans, and one question she had to ask them was this one. She talked to people -- Russian World War II veterans, many of whom you know, and none of them understood the question. They all were drafted.
BG: This is probably a generational question. Until 1975 that was true about Americans as well. There is a nobility in honorable service no matter how you got there, but since 1975 it is all volunteer, highly motivated force. Volunteers, people who made a decision to enlist have a healthier mind set. To answer your question --- would I do it again?  I would. I'm still in the active reserve and was deployed three times since 2001. I could resign my commission at any time, but I'm not planning to do it until I'm able to do the job. It is a good thing for me as a person to do things that are difficult. I want to assure safety and security for the American people, including my family.
GM: What are you doing in your civilian life?
BG: I'm the Commissioner of the Department of Energy and Telecommunication of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I came home into very troubling circumstances on the energy front. It takes time and effort to make a transition into civilian life after 210 days in Iraq. You come home, but your head is still there. There are serious issues in front of us, but I can't imagine anybody in Iraq who would not want to trade places with us. We should be very grateful.
GM: Brian, on behalf of your many friends in our community, on behalf of people whom you know and don't know -- Thank you!
BG: Thank you, Greg. I'm so grateful as a friend for your presence in my life. Thank you and thank you to all your readers and the community, I'm always very aware of their support.
GM: I want to wish you and your family a politically incorrect Merry Christmas.
BG: Happy Chanukah and a peaceful New Year!

Here is a couple of great background links -- Brian's interview with Kathryn Jean Lopez in the National Review online, and Brian's own funny and thoughful piece on the other JFK -- John F. Kerry, also in NRO.

(Photos: on the base in Baghdad, flying over Iraq, with RJCF's Ary Rorman at the Russian Jewish Community Charity ball upon return home)

posted by: jrtelegraph

 

Boston Herald: Islamic Society of Boston Tries to Suppress Media Inquiry Into Controversial Issues

Did the Boston Herald, Fox 25, the David Project, Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project, various private citizens and advocacy group, did all of them conspire to tarnish the reputation of the Islamic Society of Boston?
Are all of these groups and people racist xenophobes? All of them?
Can we still ask questions in America? Can we?

Herald seeks dismissal of Islam group defame suit
By Greg Gatlin
Saturday, December 24, 2005

The Boston Herald, WFXT-TV (Fox 25) and numerous other organizations and individuals yesterday moved for dismissal of a defamation suit brought by the Islamic Society of Boston, arguing the society’s claims of conspiracy to deny local Muslims rights of free association are not supported by fact.
    The requests for dismissal, filed in Suffolk Superior Court yesterday by the media outlets, reporters, non-profit advocacy groups and others offer various reasons why the suit should be tossed. But all argue that it fails to adequately identify statements that were false and defamatory.
    In its October suit, the Islamic Society of Boston, its trustees and two leaders, Yousef Abou-Allaban and Osama Kandil claimed the defendants joined to undermine the society’s efforts to build a mosque in Roxbury.
    The sprawling lawsuit, also alleged that through defamatory statements, the defendants “publicly portrayed the Islamic Society of Boston and its then-current leadership as Muslims who supported radical Islamic terrorism, and who were themselves active members of a terrorist organization.”
    In 2003 and 2004, the Herald ran a series of investigative reports arising from a land deal between the Islamic Society of Boston and the Boston Redevelopment Authority for the construction of a $22 million mosque and cultural center in Roxbury.
     The ISB’s complaint alleged that Herald reports falsely portrayed Kandil as a supporter of radical Islam, as a member of a terrorist network and by implication a terrorist himself. It alleged that a coordinated effort to disseminate false information about the ISB and its leadership culminated in a report on Fox 25 that falsely declared that Abou-Allaban and Kandil were members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a global terrorist organization.
    In a court filing yesterday, the Herald argued that the ISB seeks to hold the paper and its reporters liable for routine news gathering and reporting on important issues of public interest.
    The Herald’s filing said the ISB and its trustees are “attempting to suppress media inquiry” into controversial issues.
     The Herald’s motion to dismiss also claims that a civil conspiracy claim within the suit is aimed at intimidating freedom of speech. Holding the press liable for reporting on controversial issues “threatens to chill the entire news gathering and reporting process, particularly with respect to highly newsworthy stories on controversial topics,” the filing states.
    Fox 25’s filing said the ISB’s complaint, despite its “excessive length and attention to irrelevant detail,” fails to identify false and defamatory statements.
    The case is unusual in that the plaintiffs allege a broad conspiracy involving news organizations, their sources and advocacy groups. That could raise the possibility of more reporters getting sued for “conspiring” with their sources.
    In his motion to dismiss, defendant Steven Emerson of the Investigative Project Inc. wrote that the suit “essentially alleges a ‘conspiracy’ to participate in democracy and to speak freely about a public project.” Emerson has investigated and written about national security issues and terrorism for 20 years, and won a George Polk Award for his PBS documentary “Jihad in America.”
    “I was surprised that the city of Boston and the BRA appeared to be actively endorsing and entangling itself with a religion,” Emerson wrote in an affidavit. “I was concerned that the city of Boston, the BRA and Roxbury Community College did not appear to know about the ISB and its leadership even as those agencies proceed to enter into a long-term relationship with ISB.” [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Charles Jacobs: We wanted Islamic Society of Boston to answer simple questions, we got sued instead

Boston Globe published a letter by Charles Jacobs of the David Project about what's wrong with the Islamic Society of Boston:

Mosque on hold

December 25, 2005

THE STORY  on the lawsuit filed against us by the Islamic Society of Boston (''Praised by beacon, mosque project stalls amid rancor," Page A1, Dec. 18) did mention that the society's founder, Abdurahman Alamoudi, raised money for Al Qaeda and is in jail (in connection with a plot to assassinate a Saudi prince). But the story omitted even more worrisome facts.

The society's leaders have praised suicide bombers and called for attacks on Americans. A website in Qatar associated with society trustee Yousef al-Qaradawi, an internationally known leader of extremists, calls for gays to be executed by either stoning or burning. Al-Qaradawi has been barred from the United States. The society website praises as ''very good" a book that refers to the women's liberation movement as a ''Jewish plot" to corrupt society and argues that wife-beating is at times necessary. The library of the society's current Cambridge mosque contains literature containing vitriol directed against Christians, Jews, and Americans. While mosque spokesmen speak of ''dialogue" and tolerance, Qaradawi says ''there is no dialogue between us [and the Jews] except by the sword and the rifle.' "

As citizens, we were concerned. We wanted the society to answer simple questions, questions that it took pains to avoid answering. As a result, we have been sued by the society and forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars to defend ourselves. This is not a case about Boston bigots with discriminatory suspicions. It is a case of citizens rightfully worried that their city might be importing -- and subsidizing -- hatred and misogyny with links to terror.

             CHARLES JACOBS
President
The David Project
                      Boston

Here are some background links on Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi:

ADL: Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Theologian of Terror
ISB: Fact Sheet In Response to Boston Herald articles dated 10/28/2003 & 10/29/2003

posted by: jrtelegraph

Generous Saudis: $20 million to Harvard, $20 million to Georgetown, $27 million to Families of Suicide Bombers

You have to grant it to Saudis -- they are generous: $20 million went to Harvard to promote tolerance, $20 million went to Georgetown to promote tolerance, and only $27 million went to financially support suicide bombers. Now, let's picture a friendly workshop of all grantees of Prince Talal's generosity giving progress report to their benefector -- that would be a nice scene -- Harvard stuck-up academics in the line for hand-outs with jihadis. How does it feel, Larry Summers? We wondered in a previous post on this topic whether Larry Summers will eventually get lashes. After reading material below, we believe that he should.

Meanwhile here is important information from CAMERA. Oh yes, Boston Globe lied again.

On December 13th, Charles Radin of the Boston Globe reported that Saudi Arabian prince Alwaleed bin Talal is giving $20 million to Harvard University to establish a university-wide program in Islamic studies.  He is also donating another $20 million gift to Georgetown University for a similar program.

Radin notes that this is the same Prince Alwaleed who tried to donate $10 million to the Twin Towers Fund for victims. The gift was refused by former New York City mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani because of statements by Alwaleed urging the United States to re-examine its Middle East policies with regard to the Palestinian cause. However, Radin writes that  "problems with the Alwaleed donation do not seem probable. The prince, who is a nephew of Saudi King Abdullah, is widely known for his pro-American views and for his major investments in the United States."  Harvard University's Middle Eastern studies Web site provides similar complimentary material.

Radin's article, "Saudi Donates $20 Million to Harvard," missed an important component of this story. Prince Alwaleed had previously pledged another large gift of  $27 million during a telethon held in April, 2002  for the benefit of the Saudi Committee for the Support of the al-Quds Intifada. The head of the committee, Prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz, the Interior Minister, said in a statement: "The committee will continue to provide direct assistance to the families of Palestinian martyrs and those wounded while resisting the occupation (The Times of  London 4/23/02)."

Documents captured by the IDF in April of 2002 show that some of the funds provided by the Saudi telethon sponsors went to the "families of martyrs of the Palestinian Intifadah," a group that includes suicide bombers.  Kenneth Timmerman noted in Insight on the News "Saudi Wealth Fuels Global Jihadism (11/11/03)" that documents seized by the Israelis at numerous "charities" and government offices throughout the West Bank "show clearly, money paid by Saudi Arabia was considered as 'blood money.' It was used by Hamas as an enticement to murder by providing a guaranteed income to the families of the murderers."

Timmerman reported that the telethon was hosted by a prominent Saudi-government cleric, Sheikh Saad al-Buraik, who took advantage of the live television coverage to tell his audience,

"I am against America until this life ends, until the Day of Judgment, I am against America even if the stone liquefies. My hatred of America, if part of it was contained in the universe, it would collapse. She is the root of all evils and wickedness on Earth ... Muslim Brothers in Palestine, do not have any mercy, neither compassion on the Jews, their blood, their money, their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. God made them yours. Why don't you enslave their women? Why don't you wage jihad? Why don't you pillage them?"

Prince Alwaleed claimed that his telethon pledge would help rebuild Palestinian infrastructure destroyed by Israeli forces, and included a large amount of donated relief goods.  However Timmerman cites Israeli documents that offer a different story of how some of the telethon's money was used. These documents include "payment cycles" made by the Saudi Committee for Support of Intifada al-Quds for more than 300 Palestinian "victims" of the 2000-2001 uprising, many of whom were involved directly in attacks against Israeli civilians.

A report by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) titled "Saudi Arabia finances terror activities (5-9-02)," indicates that the most recent payments to the families of 102 Palestinians who died in 2001, "spelled out in chilling detail the biographies of 36 of the Palestinian 'victims.' Eight of them were identified by name in the Saudi documents as suicide bombers. The other 28 were Hamas, Fatah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad military commanders and activists directly involved in planning or executing terrorist attacks." Among these were the commander of the Hamas military wing in the West Bank, one of the heads of the Islamic Jihad  in northern Samaria and the General Secretary of the PFLP.

The IDF report further notes "the systematic and ongoing transfer of large sums of money to the Palestinians... The Saudi Committee for Support of the Intifada Al Quds, headed by the Saudi Interior Minister, stands out. The captured documents demonstrate that the Saudi support was not only of a humanitarian religious nature, as Saudi spokesmen in the U.S. claim. The documents clearly reveal that Saudi Arabia transferred ... large sums of money in a systematic and ongoing manner to families of suicide terrorists ... [and] to Hamas ... According to the captured documents, the Saudi Committee for Support of the Intifada was aware that the funds it transferred were paid to families of terrorists who perpetrated murderous attacks in Israeli cities, in which hundreds of Israelis were killed and wounded. An American woman was also killed in one of these attacks."

The IDF report concludes that persons and entities associated with the Hamas and with Radical Islam are the main beneficiaries of the funds of the Saudi Committee for Support of the Al-Aqsa Intifada (also known as the Saudi Committee for Support of the Al-Quds Intifada).

That Harvard University and Georgetown University have automatically accepted $20 million dollars each from a major benefactor of a Saudi organization that supports the families of Palestinian suicide bombers and helps fund the terrorist organization Hamas should not be allowed to slip by without mention, particularly since Harvard recently spent over a year "studying" whether to refuse a 2.5 million dollar donation from UAE President Sheikh Zayed Al Nahyan because of his links to an organization that spread hatred of Jews and Americans. The Sheikh ended up taking back his donation offer in 2004.

To read Radin's Boston Globe article, go to: http://tinyurl.com/dmcb3

(You'll probably need to register for free to access the article)

ACTION ITEMS:

 

Please write to the Boston Globe to register your dismay with their failure to report on Alwaleed bin Talal's financial support for an organization that reportedly helps fund/support Palestinian terrorism.

Ask that the newspaper do a follow up story reporting on this key information and asking why Harvard refused to immediately accept the donation of Sheikh Zayed Al Nahyan without a lengthy period of study, but accepted the Saudi prince's donation without any such study. 

 

Another interesting angle a reporter might wish to pursue with the Saudi prince: since Muslim-Christian understanding is one of his reported goals, does that mean he similarly has funded such studies in Saudi Arabia, where churches and the public practice of Christianity are banned, where Christians are arrested even for praying in meetings in private homes and where the general population has very little knowledge or understanding of Christianity?  See www.MEMRI.org for examples of Saudi persecution of Christians and for instances of virulent anti-Christian rhetoric by Saudi clerics:

 

http://tinyurl.com/8mbyj

 

http://tinyurl.com/b77aq

 

Write to the Boston Globe:   letter@globe.com

Letters may be sent by regular mail to this address:

Letters to the Editor
The Boston Globe
P.O. Box 55819
Boston, MA 02205-5819

Or by fax to (617) 929-2098

If you would like to voice your opinion to Harvard or Georgetown about their decision to accept money from Alwaleed bin Talal, you may write to:

Lawrence Summers, President of  Harvard University
lawrence_summers@harvard.edu

Office of the President
Harvard University
Massachusetts Hall
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
Tel: (617) 495-1501
Fax: (617) 495-8550

and

President John J. DeGioia
Georgetown University
Office of the President
204 Healy Hall
37th & O Streets, NW
Washington, DC 20057

Tel: (202) 687-4134
Fax: (202) 687-6660

posted by: jrtelegraph