Global Anti-Semitism

A must see video.

The Path to the Final Solution

About the resurgence of worldwide antisemitism, from Muslims to neo-nazis, radical leftists, the cultural and academic elite, the media and government officials.




It is the view of Monkey in the Middle that whenever an article, a show or a new story is done that is blatantly anti-Israel, it will be labeled as Anti-Semitic.

The Race Card Has Been Played!

Today Barack Hussein Obama, Democratic presumed nominee for the office of the Presidency of the United States, Junior Senator from the great state of Illinois, and the first African-American to win any parties nomination has announced that his opponent, John McCain will use Obama's race against him to win votes.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

“We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run,” said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. “They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. ‘He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?’"

Never once in the whole campaign have I or anyone else ever heard or read that John McCain comment on Obama's race or religion. If anything he has been a gentleman and refused to allow his campaign to stoop to such low levels.

But the Obama camp, which is already complaining of dirty tricks being used, has begun to stoop down to the level of the sewer. It was the Obama campaign that used dirty tricks to destroy Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House. And now they will try to use the same tactics against John McCain.

"They’re going to try to make me into a scary guy,” he said last week. “They’re even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat – 'we’re not sure if he’s patriotic or not; we’re not sure if he is too black.'

"I don’t know, before I wasn’t black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don’t know whether he’s going to socialize – well, who knows what.'"

This is called playing the Race Card. And you have read it hear first. Obama was the first one to use it.

This is a tactic used by Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton to blackmail corporations, schools and towns into doing their bidding. Obama learned the lesson well from those two and from his mentor is victimhood Jeremiah Wright.

What Barack Hussein Obama said today was not that my opponent will use my race against me, but if you don't vote for me, you are a racist.

No Senator. Not voting for you doesn't make me a racist. It makes me a well-informed voter who has looked at your record (or lack of it), watch you flip-flop on almost every issue, examined your idea of foreign policy, looked at the background of your advisors and senior campaign workers, examined your idea of an economic policy, listened to the hateful speeches of your wife and pastor and found you not what I want in a President of the United States.

Not a Presidential Candidate who easily uses a racial slur against me. Especially in your famous book: Dreams from My Father where you wrote:

Whether because of New York's density or because of its scale, it was only [there] that I began to grasp the almost mathematical precision with which America's race and class problems joined; the bile that flowed freely not just out on the streets but in the stalls of Columbia's bathrooms as well, where, no matter how many times the administration tried to paint them over, the walls remained scratched with blunt correspondence between niggers and kikes.

You want to use the 'N' word Senator, you can. But no Jew will ever use that word. The one I highlighted myself. I find that word offensive and personally insulting. There was no reason for it and apologizing will not help in this matter.

It is you Senator that is playing the Race Card. I've been expecting this for months now. And it is you who has shown himself to be the racist. A vote against you is a vote against racism, not for it.

The Internets Ends in 2012

Hat tip to Rebel Radius

In a world where we pay to watch TV, listen to music or play computer games we shouldn't be surprised that now the major internet providers want to make us pay for viewing each and every site we visit.

Full Story

Internet providers have realized that the only way to not lose massive amounts of customers over this is to make sure there are no alternatives, that's why all major Internet providers are currently making agreements and planning to switch simultaneously somewhere in the year 2012. This is currently all going on under very strict NDA's (Non-Disclosure Agreements) because the last thing they want is the masses speaking out against it.



Just look at those prices. To view this or any other blog, myspace, youtube would cost a person almost $50.00 a month. In effect they, the internet providers, would censor what you can or cannot view. If they cannot stop a person legally, they will stop them by monetary means.

Net neutrality has been a much debated issue for several years now and there have been many lawsuits in cases where an Internet provider blocked access to a certain competitor's site or simply crippled download speeds on services that they felt were using up too much of their bandwidth. But this new information that has now been confirmed by inside sources from major ISP's and content providers gives us a far bleaker vision of what the future of Internet freedom will look like if we don't take action in every way we can.




Can you imagine a time in the near future where you cannot play World of Warcraft without paying an extra $50.00 a month. Where you cannot access a news site without paying extra? Where you cannot chat in a chatroom, IM a friend or even access your email without paying extra? Get used to it. For that will be the way of the future.

Already AP is suing bloggers for using their articles to write posts. Once an idea is out in cyberspace, it is a free idea to use. Unless you can provide pure copywrite law to it. And even then it is hard to prove when you link back to the full article or quote just a short paragraph.

This is happening now. In some places a trial experiment is being conducted to see if this idea will work.

Why is this happening? The entire media and marketing industry is losing its grip on the upcoming generations of Internet-minded consumers. Statistics show that traditional media is losing popularity as the Internet continues to grow drastically every year. And the Internet is a completely different place: consumers aren't passive any more and advertisements don't have the same psychological effect they normally have on television. Internet users are very active and focused: they only go to the sites and services they want, and with an infinite amount of alternatives, users simply switch to something else if one service becomes too commercialized with annoying advertisements. With this in mind, it's no surprise that the past 6 years the industry has secretly been planning a 'take-over' to secure the Internet as a purely commercial playground.

We can stop this before it is too late! It is up to each and every one of us to spread the word and keep the internet a free place. We need to make our elected officials aware of this and to make certain in no uncertain words that WE WILL NOT GO ALONG WITH THIS! WE WANT OUR INTERNET TO BE FREE FOR ALL TO USE! THAT THE LITTLE PERSON SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR WHAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN FREE!

It is our internet. It should always be free!

Free Speech Bound and Gagged!

Hat tip to Hot Air

Some things are best left unsaid. And this week's Jihad Watch video is one of them.





Freedom of Speech means that any speech, even the most hateful is protected speech.

Practice Makes Perfect!

On 7 June 1981, Israel attacked and destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak near Baghdad. This preemptive strike prevented Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein from developing an nuclear weapon. A weapon he actually said that he was working on to use against Israel. The UN condemned Israel at the time for this action, but in retrospective analysis the world owes Israel a debt of gratitude for their foresight. The 1991 Gulf War would have been a very different one if Saddam had nuclear weapons and was willing to use them.

On Friday the New York Times reported that Israel carried out a major military drill during the first week of June that US sources say was apparently a rehearsal for a potential attack on Iran's nuclear sites.

Several US officials were quoted by the newspaper as saying that it seemed the drill was an effort to develop Israel's capacity to carry out long-range strikes and to show the gravity with which Israel views the Iranian nuclear issue.

More than 100 IAF F-16 and F-15 fighter jets took part in the exercise, which was carried out over the eastern Mediterranean and over Greece, the officials said.

The drill also included IAF rescues helicopters, said the officials, adding that the helicopters and refueling tankers flew more than 900 miles, which is approximately the distance between Israel and Iran's uranium enrichment plant at Natanz.

Full Story

In the months before the attack on Iraq's nuclear facility, the IAF practiced and practiced their attack. Practicing for an attack is nothing new to any military in the world. That's one reason militaries have war games.

Nevertheless, a senior Pentagon official, who the Times claimed was briefed on the drill, and who spoke on condition of anonymity, said it appeared to serve multiple purposes.

One aim, according to the official, was to practice flight tactics, aerial refueling and all other details of a possible attack on Iran's nuclear sites and its long-range missiles.

A second goal, the official was quoted by the Times as saying, was to give a clear message to the US and the rest of the world that Israel was prepared to attack Iran if diplomatic efforts to stop the country's march toward the production of bomb-grade uranium fail.

"They wanted us to know, they wanted the Europeans to know, and they wanted the Iranians to know," the Pentagon official reportedly said. "There's a lot of signaling going on at different levels."

But that this has been released now may be a signal to Iran that Israel is not a paper tiger as they have so often claimed as have their proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. Although it now seems that stiffer sanctions might be imposed upon Iran, the Israelis are not going to rule out a military options. That is if they can ever get rid of Olmert and get someone as Prime Minister with a couple of balls. Until that time I hope that the IAF keeps practicing for an air strike on Iran. For after all we all know:

Practice Makes Perfect!

Somethings Rotten In The State of Hawaii

Hat tip to Stop the ACLU

Just when Obama thought the debate over his birth certificate and Hawaiian birth was over, a new wrinkle has erupted in the debate.

This birth certificate looks good. Too good. If you clink on it, you will see a more detailed picture of it.



The Obama campaign published this on-line for the world to see. But there are many flaws with it. These flaws are pointed out here. This analysis was done by an expert of 20 years with computers, printers and typewriters.

The "Certificate of Birth," which I will call "COB," is posted on the Kos website as a color JPG. The reason for making it a color JPG, IMHO, is to induce the viewer to believe that this is a genuine copy of an original document -- something that a black & white, or even greyscale, reproduction would not convey as well.

Basically, anyone could have produced this document on his or her own computer, and I'll tell you why.

This expert used his own birth certificate and tried to replicate the results on his computer. Being from the same state as the writer, I used my own birth certificate as a reference. The is a marked difference not only in color, but in the background of the scanned certificate opposed to the original. The State of NY must use a security pattern to prevent fraud. Doesn't Hawaii do the same? I checked my daughters birth certificates they each were born in different states, one in Tennessee and one in Kentucky. Each had watermarks centered on the certificate. As you can see Obama's doesn't have one. I don't know if it is true of Hawaii, but most states use a watermark or other device, normally centered on the certificate as a way of preventing fraud.

And as you can see on the New York certificate (this isn't mine, but it is a valid one) and on other certificates from other states the signature of the Registrar is on it, but missing from Obama's. Nor is the Registrar's name on it.

This expert then goes on to explain an anomaly in the way the lettering and border is presented in Obama's birth certificate.

Any text made by a typewriter, laser printer, or even inkjet printer, would NOT have the smeared, black & white pixels underneath it -- there would be several pixels bearing the same color as the paper, nor would the left side of the letters be clear and free of any artifacts or shadows. Scalable type produced by a graphics program will look about the same regardless of the magnification with a minimal or uneven staircase pattern of pixels on its sides, whereas printed text -- even laser text -- will show a clear, uniform staircase pattern of pixels on both sides of each letter that proportionately increase in size with magnification.

All of the letters that appear on Barack's Certificate of Birth were made, at the same time, and by the same method -- which was the use of a graphics program and not the use of any printer.

You can also tell that this is an obvious Photochop by looking at the border patterns.

Looking at the corners of the darker green border, you can see that the border is discontinuous. In other words, the vertical border bars were made by drawing a long rectangle, copying that rectangle, and then overlaying each of them on either side.

If this is a forgery, why the cover-up? It seems that either the Obama campaign has to make another forgery or better, the State of Hawaii actually produce a copy of his birth certificate.

If Flip-Flopping Was An Olympic Sport, Obama Would Win A Gold Medal

I have never seen any candidate for any political office flip-flop as much as I have seen Barack Hussein Obama do these last few months. I have often commented that he doesn't look like a candidate for the Presidency of the US, but a candidate for the US Men's Olympic Gymnastics Team. It is a wonder he hasn't hurt himself with all the back flips he has done to convince this special interest group or another special interest group to vote for him. He will say anything to anybody just to garner their support. A typical politician.

In February,2008, Obama sent out a mailer which stated that Hillary Clinton was for NAFTA and Obama had always been against it. Fortune Magazine conducted an interview with Obama where he seems to admit his NAFTA talk during the primary, was "rhetoric".

Exactly what we should expect from Obama. Now he cries: NAFTA not so bad after all. His score from the judges on that flip-flop should be a 10.

In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA.

"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.

I never approved of NAFTA myself. I saw that it would take jobs from Americans and send them first to Mexico, then when that became too expensive, overseas. It was a bad idea and a bad treaty.

Now, however, Obama says he doesn't believe in unilaterally reopening NAFTA. On the afternoon that I sat down with him to discuss the economy, Obama said he had just spoken with Harper, who had called to congratulate him on winning the nomination.

"I'm not a big believer in doing things unilaterally," Obama said. "I'm a big believer in opening up a dialogue and figuring out how we can make this work for all people."

If this was his only flip-flop I could understand it. But it isn't. Barack Hussein Obama has flip-flopped on his position on Jerusalem. At first he said:

"Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided," Obama declared Wednesday, to rousing applause from the 7,000-plus attendees at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy conference.

Then his adviser said he really meant:

But a campaign adviser clarified Thursday that Obama believes "Jerusalem is a final status issue, which means it has to be negotiated between the two parties" as part of "an agreement that they both can live with."

And then his adviser finally came out with:

"Two principles should apply to any outcome," which the adviser gave as: "Jerusalem remains Israel's capital and it's not going to be divided by barbed wire and checkpoints as it was in 1948-1967."

Which is it going to be Senator? Divided the way the Palestinians want, or undivided the way the Israelis want? You can't have it both ways. You have to anger someone. Which groups votes do you want more? Jews or Muslims. You are angering both sides. Just yesterday you angered Muslims when 2 of your staffers barred Muslim women wearing headscarves from being seen behind you.

I can understand why you want to distance yourself from Muslims Senator. After all your own website says:

Obama has never been a Muslim, and is a committed Christian.

Yet your own half-brother Malik has said differently.

Barack Obama's half brother Malik said Thursday that if elected his brother will be a good president for the Jewish people, despite his Muslim background.

I expect Senator Obama to throw dear brother Malik under the bus in the coming weeks. He has to distance himself from his Muslim background in order to win votes in the US.

If Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh were running for President of the United States, he "would promise to support Israel and guarantee its security, and would move the United States embassy to Jerusalem," wrote Abdul Rahman Al Rashed, General Manager of the Al Arabiya news network.

He stated that Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama's enthusiastic support for Israel is standard operating procedure for every American candidate. "Even the Israelis cannot believe the promises," wrote Al Rashed.

No Israelis don't believe them. They see right through them as if they were made of glass. They know when a politician is lying to them. They understand lip service when they hear it.

Al Rashed reminded readers that every American president must commit himself to Israel's security because Israel was the most loyal Middle East country to the U.S. during the Cold war with the Soviet Union.

"The United States considers Israel as its big stick, which it uses when needed, a service that none of the friendly Arab countries can do," he wrote. "The price is relatively inexpensive [because] the United States spent funds in Iraq in five years, to no avail, more than it has spent on Israel in 60 years. This viewpoint does not seem clear to Arabs."

You could say that with Israel, the US has gotten more bang for its buck. But to Barack Hussein Obama the money spent on Israel is wasted money. And privately he has told people that he would cut all funds to Israel. Again the flip-flop.

Obama can't seem to make up his mind which side of the fence on these issues to sit on. He really should come clean with the American people. For the American people are beginning to wise up to the fact that Obama will say anything to get elected.

Flight 93: Who Broke the Circle

The Memorial Project claims to have an innocent explanation for why the central feature of the Flight 93 memorial is a giant Islamic shaped crescent. As architect Paul Murdoch has been saying since September 2005, the flight path breaks the circle, turning it into what was originally called the Crescent of Embrace.

But this isn't a memorial to an airliner. It is a memorial to human beings. So just who is it that architect Paul Murdoch is depicting as breaking the circle?

As a secular symbol, the circle signifies peace and harmony. There is no way that the heroic passengers and crew can be charged with breaking the circle. It is the terrorists who broke the peace.


Think what that means thematically. The terrorists broke our peaceful circle and turned it into a giant Islamic shaped crescent that just happens to point to Mecca . You could not come up with a more blatant depiction of al Qaeda victory.


This is what the Park Service is claiming as an innocent explanation: that they are depicting a circle-breaking crescent-creating action that logically can only be attributed to the terrorists. Are they really too dumb to figure out what that means?

Take action

How about a couple hundred of us call up the Memorial Project (814 443-4557) and ask them just who is being depicted as "breaking the circle"? If they try to say "Flight 93 broke it," we can ask for clarification. Do they really mean to include our forty heroes amongst those who broke the peace?

They might even admit that it can only be the terrorists who are depicted as turning the circle into a crescent, and they might even realize: "oops."

Maybe we should send a few emails as well, and cc the local press, who might be prompted to ask Memorial Project spokesmen how they are answering our pointed questions. (Click link for addressed email form. Feel free to cut and paste text from above. Sincerely, your name and state.)

The circle is a Christian symbol

In addition to being a secular symbol of harmony, the circle is also a Christian symbol, as referenced in the country-gospel line: "may the circle be unbroken, bye and bye, Lord bye and bye." (Hat tip, No Compromise.)

The origin of the circle as a Christian symbol is the rising sun, which is today seen as the primary reason why many Christian churches conduct their liturgies facing east. (For some early churches, this was also the direction to Jerusalem .)

As Pope Benedict explained (back when he was Cardinal Ratzinger):

The cosmic symbol of the rising sun expresses the universality of God above all particular places and yet maintains the concreteness of Divine Revelation.

The circle and cross are seen together in the Celtic cross, thought to have been introduced to Ireland by Saint Patrick in the 5th century:




Nobody knows exactly what Saint Patrick had in mind, but the circle is thought to represent the sun.

Given that architect Paul Murdoch clearly has religious symbolism in mind (the repeated Mecca orientations in his design prove that), it is reasonable to infer that he is aware that the circle is a Christian symbol, and that the circle remaining unbroken is a Christian ideal.

Thus the Islamic victory symbolized in the crescent memorial is not just over the secular west, but in particular signifies the smashing of Christianity, and the triumph of Islam in its stead.

Just the fact that the crescent design CAN be interpreted in these ways is enough to make the design inappropriate, but these are not just POSSIBLE interpretations. They are the only logical interpretations. The breaking of the circle can only be attributed to the terrorists.

The drag lines were removed because they did not fit with Paul Murdoch's circle-breaking, crescent-creating theme

Last week's blogburst explained why architect Paul Murdoch was determined to get rid of the gigantic strip-mining derricks that were just up the slope from the impact crater. They were infidel artifacts, obstructing the view towards Mecca from within Murdoch's giant Mecca pointing crescent:



Can't have that majestic American flag interrupting the view towards Mecca !

Amazingly, the Park Service's official explanation for the removal of the drag lines is that they don't fit with Paul Murdoch's circle-breaking theme:

National Park Service Deputy General Superintendent Keith Newlin said the National Park Service has a tendency to preserve landscapes and key elements of memorial sites if it will help people understand what happened there. The draglines weren’t in the airplane’s flight path, though they have been used as a reference point to explain the plane’s trajectory to first-time visitors.

“The draglines didn’t contribute to the overall understanding of Flight 93,” he said. “We heard comments that we should keep one as a flagpole, but when we weighed everything, we decided against it.”

The pair of giant cranes didn't mark the flight path? They marked its termination! To everybody in the area, these WERE the marker: "Up by the drag lines!"

Where did Newlin ever get the idea that the direction of the flight path somehow trumps the point of impact? He got it from Paul Murdoch, whose design is all about orientations. He positions his circle just right so that a "break" at the point where the flight path crosses the circle (together with another break 2/3rds of the way around the circle) will create the giant Mecca oriented crescent.

Now here we have Newlin asserting that it isn't the crash site that matters, but these Mecca orienting angles!

For the memorialization of OUR heroes, the drag lines were an ideal marker: an actual manifestation of the dramatic achievements of ordinary citizens, saluting the towering achievement of the citizens of Flight 93.

The only "understanding" they didn't fit was the narrative of Islamic victory that architect Paul Murdoch is trying to impose, where our American circle gets supplanted by a giant Islamic crescent.

To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.

Why Americans Think the War in Iraq is Failing.

Today we have 24/7 news. It should be a good thing, but the majority of the newscasters and analysts have a liberal bend to their thinking. So when they report they skewer the story to an anti-war, anti-American slant.

The surge is working very well. But we don't hear about the successes, only the failures. In every war, there are failures as well as successes. That is the nature of war. You cannot win every battle.

A parallel is being drawn between Iraq and Vietnam. Both were long wars, both were unpopular with the liberal left, and both were long. People forget that if the media didn't report the way they did, the North was going to surrender to the South. We won the Tet offensive. But the way the media reported the event, it seemed to the American people that we were losing. Thus we lost the war due to inept media coverage.

This could have been true with World War 2. If the media had covered that war the same way they cover it today, we would still have the Nazis ruling much of Europe.



What this proves, is that you have to take the media's reports with a large grain of salt. Don't believe everything they tell you. The media has an agenda to push upon the American people a liberal, anti-American viewpoint.

MEMRI: The Iranian Roots of Hizbollah

From the desks of MEMRI

"Iran is the only country that does not interfere in Lebanon." Mahmoud Ahamdinejad(1)


Introduction

Ahmadinejad's absurd statement coincided ironically with the publication in the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat of an extensive interview with Mohammad Hassan Akhteri, who has recently completed a total of 14 years as Iran's ambassador to Syria. By his own admission, Akhteri was the most senior Iranian liaison official with Hizbullah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, and the architect of the special relationship between Iran and Syria. Akhteri was also the founder in Damascus of the Palestinian-Iranian Friendship Society.

In the interview, published in two parts on May 14 and May 15, 2008, Akhteri distinguishes between the spiritual father (al-ab al-rouhi) of Hizbullah, the one who initiated the idea, and the "field father" (al-ab al-midani). Akhteri considers himself the latter, while his predecessor in Damascus, Ali Muhtashemi, was the former.(2)

Akhteri's Background and Proselytizing Activity

Akhteri was born in Qom in 1928, and came to diplomacy from his position as Friday preacher at the Samnan mosque, north of Tehran. He studied religious jurisprudence at a hawza (a Shi'ite religious center) in Qom. Concurrently with his role as ambassador to Damascus, Akhteri has served for the last four years as the head of the International Society of aal-al-beit, the Prophet Mohammad's descendents, who are viewed by the Shi'ite branch of Islam as the legitimate rulers of Islam. The Aal-al-beit Society is also engaged in spreading "Shi'ite Islamic consciousness," essentially a proselytizing organization which seeks converts to Shi'ite Islam.

Akhteri served two terms as ambassador to Damascus: the first, longer term from 1986 to 1997, and the second from 2005 to January 2008. But before serving as ambassador, he had accumulated a record as a proselytizer: He spent some time in Homs, Syria in 1969, and from there he went to Lebanon for two and a half years, through 1972, to carry out religious activities and tabligh (spreading of Islam).

Facing the First Crisis

Akhteri arrived in Syria in 1986, at a time of conflict between the Palestinians and the Shi'ite Movement – Amal – that was created by Imam Moussa al-Sadr in the 1960s as a social-service organization intended to improve the living conditions of the Shi'ite community in southern Lebanon, one of the poorest communities in the country. Al-Sadr, born in Iran and educated in Qom, also established the Shi'ite Supreme Islamic Council in 1969. Al-Sadr flew to Tripoli, Libya on August 25, 1978 and there he disappeared. His disappearance, six months prior to the success of the Iranian revolution, was a key factor in the marginalization of the Amal Movement, and the birth of Hizbullah.

The Splintering of Amal and the Creation of Hizbullah

The Islamic regime of Iran after the revolution regarded the Amal Movement with suspicion because it seemed insufficiently religious, and lacking the suitability or will to be an instrument of spreading the Iranian revolution. In addition, it was led by politicians, many of them were secular, rather than by clerics. In fact, the very name Amal (Hope) lacked religious ring. On its part, Amal was disenchanted with Iran because during its conflict with the Palestinians Iran supported the latter.

As a result, Iran encouraged elements from the Amal Movement to splinter and establish a religious party that would be more in tune with the concept of wilayat al-faqih, [the Rule of the Jurisprudent] introduced by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the spiritual and political leader of the Islamic Republic. Once that party, Hizbullah, was established, Khomeini ordered elements of the Revolutionary Guards to go to Lebanon to train its young cadres.

The Iranian ambassador to Damascus from 1982-85, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, was quoted by Al-Sharq Al-Awsat as telling an Iranian newspaper that Hizbullah gained part of its battle experience through its participation in the war against Iraq. According to Mohtashemi, more than 100,000 young Lebanese received military training both in Lebanon and in Iran in groups of 300 fighters. Akhteri has also conceded that elements of Hizbullah fought in the war with Iraq "either within our ranks or by themselves."

Akhteri recalls that five planeloads of Revolutionary Guards and Basij (youth militia) landed in Damascus to stand with Hizbullah during the 1982 Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon, but Khomeini stopped any further dispatch of Iranian forces to Lebanon because of logistical problems. According to Akhteri, supplying a military contingency in Lebanon would have been difficult with the war raging between Iran and Iraq. The only other alternative would have been to go through Turkey, but Turkey was a member of NATO. Hence, the real alternative was to train Hizbullah's cadres in Lebanon itself.

Syria Allowed the Passage of Military Aid to Hizbullah

The arming of Hizbullah could not have been possible without the support of Syria. When Hizbullah was established, Syria was in control of Lebanon, and no one could come and go without the approval of the Syrian regime. In fact, Akhteri admits that throughout his "diplomatic" mission to Syria he coordinated his activities in Lebanon with Ghazi Kan'an, who was chief of Syrian intelligence in Lebanon from 1982-2001, and who became minister of interior in October 2003 and who in 2005 allegedly committed suicide. (Kan'an may have been involved in the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri. As the international investigation of the assassination was beginning to implicate the Syrian regime, Kan'an may have been silenced by a staged – unexplainable – suicide.)

In his interview with Al-Asharq Al-Awsat , Ambassador Akhteri stated with evident pride that Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, and Hamas are the "legitimate children of the Iranian revolution," and that Iran has supported them financially, politically, and morally. There was coordination between Iran and each of these organizations, but Akhteri argues that any final decisions were taken by these groups themselves.

The Establishment of Al-Manar TV

To solidify its control over its supporters and to spread Shi'ite Islamic fervor, Hizbullah needed its own television station, but Lebanon was reluctant to approve an independent station for Hizbullah. According to former Syrian vice president Abdul Halim Khaddam, now living in exile in France, the Iranian president at the time, Hashemi Rafsanjani, called Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad to obtain a license for Al-Manar TV. Assad told then-Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri to grant the permit, and the permit was granted. The establishment of Al-Manar was one of the steps that, Akhteri stresses, "strengthened the independence of Hizbullah on the Lebanese political scene."(3)

Hizbullah's Social Institutions – Identical To Iran's

In addition to Al-Manar TV, Hizbullah was able, with Iran's financing, to establish a wide range of social, financial, and economic institutions that strengthened the loyalty of the Shi'ites in Lebanon to Iran. One of the significant financial arms of Hizbullah is the Shahid Foundation (Martyrs Foundation), an Iran-based organization established in 1982 in Iran to assist victims of the Iran-Iraq war. In 2007, the U.S. Treasury targeted "Iran-based Martyrs Foundation," including its U.S. branch, and the finance firm Al-Qardh al-Hassan (Good Deed Loan) as front organizations for Hizbullah. According to the Treasury, the Martyrs Foundation branches in Lebanon provided financial support to the families of killed or imprisoned Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad members, including suicide bombers in the Palestinian territories. Al-Qardh al-Hassan created the Goodwill Charitable Organization (munathamat al-niyya al-hasana al-khairiya) in Dearborn, Michigan as a fundraising office for the Martyrs Foundation.

According to the U.S. Treasury, Hizbullah used the Al-Qardh al-Hassan's financial arms as cover to manage its financial activity. Al-Qardh al-Hassan is run by Hussein al-Shami, a senior Hizbullah leader who has also served as a member of Hizbullah's Shura Council and as head of several Hizbullah-controlled organizations.(4)

Hussein Raslan, in charge of the social functions in the Martyrs Foundation, told Islamonline on August 13, 2006, that the idea for the Foundation originated with Khomeini, who provided the financing from zakat (alms contributed by Muslims). Raslan said that the first Hizbullah school was established in Beirut in 1988, but that eventually the school was incorporated into the Imam al-Mahdi Foundation in 2002. The flow of funds [from Iran], Raslan said, enabled Hizbullah to establish a series of enterprises including those dealing with food supply, gasoline and printing houses. Hizbullah schools in Lebanon, either under Khomeini or al-Mahdi Foundations, follow the Iranian curriculum.

Hizbullah has also established a network of hospitals (dispensing Iranian-made medicines), banks, and cultural organizations. Finally, there are the Hizbullah police, who are responsible for maintaining "good manners" on the street – meaning, among other things, that women are always veiled in public. Money from Iran keeps this massive apparatus running.

Refusal to Pay for Electricity

One of the least-known facts about the dominance of Hizbullah in parts of Lebanon is the refusal of its members to pay their electric bills. Without the means to force them to do so, the Lebanese government is left with one of its largest budgetary problems – the growing subsidy the government has to pay to the national power company, Electricite du Liban.

The Shi'ization of Syria

The International Aal-Al-Beit Society, which operates under Iran's supreme leader, currently Ali Khamenei, and whose primary function is to spread Shi'ism (tashayu') in the rest of the Muslim world, took advantage of Iran's special relations with Syria in order to establish Shi'ite religious seminaries in Damascus. In fact, Damascus has now at least three hawzas (religious centers,) and is considered the third largest Shi'ite center in the world after Najaf and Qom. While Akhteri minimizes the proselytizing functions of the Aal Al-Beit society in Syria, there are concerns sounded in both Syria and the Arab world about the tashayu' effort – not only in Syria but in other countries, such as Egypt and Sudan.

Conclusion

This paper highlights two significant facts: first, Hizbullah was created and sustained by Iran. Iranian financial support has made it possible for this political organization to build a network of schools, hospitals, social welfare organizations and above all, military prowess. It now serves as an extension of Iran's strategic expansion into the Mediterranean.

Second, it is absolutely evident that Iran's extended arm into Lebanon would not have been possible without the collusion or approval of the Syrian regime. Syria is also the main conduit of arms from Iran to Hizbullah.

*Dr. Nimrod Raphaeli is the Editor of The MEMRI Economic Blog, www.memrieconomicblog.org. This dispatch is based on a presentation made by the author at a panel on "The Iranization of Lebanon?" at the Potomac Institute on May 23, 2008.

---

Notes

(1) Press conference in Tehran, May 13, 2008.
(2) Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), May 14 and May 15, 2008.
(3) Manal Lutfi, "The Limits of the State of Hizbullah," Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), May 20, 2009
(4) Twin Treasury Actions Take Aim at Hizballah’s Support Network, July 24, 2007.


Note from Monkey in the Middle:

Make no mistake. Hizbollah is controlled by Iran. From financial support to health care, Iran is pulling the strings.

What struck me is that they refuse to pay their electric bills. If this was the the United States, their electricity would have been disconnected long ago. And the Lebanese government should do just that, while explaining to the world that if you don't pay your electric bill, you don't get electricity.

Remember the name Goodwill Charitable Organization. It is a front for the Martyrs Foundation. And is centered in Dearborn, MI. A hotbed of Hizbollah and terrorist activity in the United States.

The time has come for a full financial and congressional inquiry into the activities of all mosques, institutions and charities in Dearborn, MI. Too many times illegal and seditious activities are being covered up and hidden in these places. We must act now before they strike us with another 9/11 attack or worse.

A Loony Toon Foreign Policy

Gentle Truth Seekers I could not begin to make this one up. When I first read the article that I am commenting on, I became hysterical and had to read it 5 times. I still don't believe it.

In the past the world has experienced many different theories of how foreign policy should be formulated and utilized. There was the Marxist view, trying to bring the whole world under the domination of the former Soviet Union. There was the Domino Theory, in which one nation that falls under Communism will cause the neighboring nations to fall under Communism. We experienced Teddy Roosevelt's Big Stick policy, in which he claimed, had the right not only to oppose European intervention in the Western Hemisphere, but also to intervene in the domestic affairs of our neighbors if they proved unable to maintain order and national sovereignty on their own. In essence this policy was reduced to, "We are going to intervene to prevent you from intervening." Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points, which became the basis for the Treaty of Versailles following World War I. But never before has a foreign policy been based on a children's book. Until now.

I present to you Barack Hussein Obama's new foreign policy theory. Winnie the Pooh. No I'm not joking and this is not an April Fool's Joke. Richard Danzig, former Navy Secretary under President Bill Clinton said:

“Winnie the Pooh seems to me to be a fundamental text on national security.”

Mr Danzig spelt out the need to change by reading a paragraph from chapter one of the children’s classic, which says: “Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump on the back of his head behind Christopher Robin. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming down stairs. But sometimes he thinks there really is another way if only he could stop bumping a minute and think about it.”

That's just the sort of thing I'd expect Eeyore to say. Considering the source, I can see that another Jackass is at work. Mr. Danzig I hate to inform you about this, but Winnie the Pooh is a fictional children's book. Not a text on foreign policy.

But Winnie the Pooh isn't his only source for a foreign policy. He also believes the "War on Terror" would best be fought by using Jedi Knights.

He spelt out how American troops, spies and anti-terrorist officials could learn key lessons by understanding the desire of terrorists to emulate superheroes like Luke Skywalker, and the lust for violence of violent football fans.

Mr. Danzig what you see in the movies is not real. Star Wars, while a good film, was a fictional story. I think you should stop watching movies, reading children's books and comic books. It is time to come into the real world.

He said that another lesson about terrorists can be learnt from studying violent football fans. “One of the best books I’ve read on terrorism in recent years was not about terrorism at all,” he said. “It’s Bill Buford’s book Among the Thugs, which is a description of soccer violence in Britain.

Actually I'm not using Football Thugs as a model for any foreign policy. I'm waiting for these men to finally get fed up with the Dhimmitude they are being forced into and start a real riot. Not over a football team, but over their deteriorating rights. Will you still be admiring them then?

This is just another reason why Barack Hussein Obama is unfit for the Office of President of the United States. His advisers live in another reality, far removed from the one the rest of us live in. And if his advisers feel and think this way, he too must follow this line of thought. And in this day and age makes Obama a very dangerous person to be put into the highest office of the land.

Today in Jewish History

13 Silvan



In 1948, 20 Jews were killed by a bombing of the Jewish Quarter in Cairo, Egypt. (In the coming months, more bombings in Cairo killed an additional 50 Jews.) In the period following Israel's declaration of independence, anti-Jewish riots broke out across the Arab world. Jews were attacked and imprisoned, Jewish property was seized, and most of these centuries-old Jewish communities were forced to disband. In 1948, the Jewish population of Egypt was 75,000; it now numbers less than 100.

And where did these Jews run to? Israel. The only nation that would take them in. They are part of the nearly 1 million Jews banished from Arab lands from 1948-1955. Why are there no tears for them? Why isn't the world demanding a Law of Return for them? Why is there no Justice for them?

UPDATE: UCU Boycott of Israel

In late May, Monkey in the Middle reported that the University and College Union (UCU), the largest trade union in the UK for academics and academic related staff decided to try and implement (for the second time) a total boycott of Jewish and Israeli academics. This resolution passed without debate and without any dissent.

Now the rank and file members are grumbling against this boycott.

The University and College Union (UCU) are wavering on whether to implement a motion calling for the boycott of Israeli academia knowing the motion is "illegal" and "discriminatory," according to anti-boycott campaigners.
At the first meeting of the union's National Executive Committee (NEC) on Friday, members failed to make a decision on the motion passed that will in effect reintroduce an academic boycott of Israel.

Instead members referred the motion to the Strategy and Finance Committee (SFC), which will examine new legal advice the UCU is seeking and will then decide if any parts of the motion can be implemented.

Last year this same group tried the same thing and found not only did the rank and file members reject the idea, but it was illegal by their own legal advisors.

"If a boycott were legal, the union would not have hesitated in implementing it," Lorna Fitzsimons, co-chair of the Stop the Boycott (STB) campaign said. "It is clearly playing for time, its actions show that the union knows what we have known for the past four years - that a boycott is illegal and will be challenged in the courts.

"What is perplexing in the extreme is the UCU's decision to continue to pursue this when it knows that it will end the same sticky way as last year," Fitzsimons added.

A bunch of pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic educators wishing to impose a boycott on their rank and file. They will impose their hatred on the British education community and will not worry about the consequences of their actions.

The latest move will undoubtedly come as a disappointment to those who have publicly criticized the motion. People as diverse as the prime minister, the higher education minister, the shadow education minister, the Foreign Office, Israeli and Palestinian Trade Unions as well as the heads of Universities UK [an organization of executive heads of all UK universities] and the Russell Group [an association of leading UK research-intensive universities] have all condemned the union's decision to call for a boycott.

Last year when this was proposed, Universities and Colleges in the US proclaimed that if the UCU implements a boycott of Israelis, they will implement a boycott of all British academicians. The call started with the Ivy Leagues and eventually included almost all of the Universities and Colleges in the US. I'll give you 3 guesses which ones didn't add their voices.

To implement this boycott would be illegal in the UK and immoral. But as things are with the leftists in charge of academia, anti-Semitism is an acceptable. They must not insult or demean their Muslim overlords who pay their expenses. So boycotts of Israelis and Jews will be allowed, criticism of Islam and Shar'ia law isn't.

Blogs for Borders 061608

Our weekly vlog -- podcast on illegal immigration and border security issues. In this weeks edition...

Assimilation blues: why are la Raza and several other Hispanic groups so afraid of scrutiny toward the Hispanic community? We investigate.

100% Preventable! Americans continue to pay the bloody price for open borders! When will the madness end?

And, Who are the people in your neighborhood? Globalists, open border freaks and diversophiles insist that we are enriched by other cultures. But is this always true? We take a look.

Download for your ipod here.

Our friend John Monti is facing yet another bogus legal challenge (learn more here) and he could use our support.

Click on image

If you'd like to sponsor a show contact us here. Make sure to join his Facebook group and hit the tip jar!

This has been the Blogs For Borders Video Blogburst. The Blogs For Borders Blogroll is dedicated to American sovereignty, border security and a sane immigration policy. If you’d like to join find out how right here.

Technorati Tags: illegal immigration, open borders, deportation, rape, hit and run, invasion, podcast, vlog, mexico, culture, tolerance, multi-culturalism, insanity, steven rand rouvet, rapto,

Dhimmi Carter is Traveling Again

Hat tip to Israel Matzav

Fresh from his excursion to Damascus where he met with Hamas leaders praising them and calling for Israel's destruction. And fresh from his visit to the grave of the murderer Arafat. Siding with Hamas isn't enough for this anti-Semite. Now Dhimmi Carter is going to Lebanon to meet with Hezbollah leaders.

Lebanese press reports over the weekend indicate that former US President Jimmy Carter is expected to meet with leading officials from Hizbullah over the course of the summer. This visit would come on the heels of Carter’s visit to Damascus two months ago, in which he met with the head of the Hamas terrorist organization’s political wing, Khaled Mashaal.

And maybe they will let Carter fire a couple of rockets into Israel, he couldn't get to Gaza to shoot off any.

Carter has received criticism in both Israel and the United States for these contacts with Hamas terrorist figures. He has been a vocal critic of Israel, especially in terms of counterterrorism policies, in recent years. Carter also broke with longstanding US policy by laying a wreath on Arafat's grave in April 2008.

Carter is either very naive or carrying messages for Hezbollah from Barack Hussein Obama. Considering that Carter has endorsed Obama recently, although he made it known that he was favoring Obama during the primary season and since every policy Obama has is the exact same one as Dhimmi Carter, including many of his advisors. I wonder what deals is Obama trying to make with these terrorists?

Is it that while Obama is trying to court the Jewish vote in the US, he is promising Hamas and Hezbollah to help them wipe out Israel? I wouldn't put it pass him. Obama isn't just a crooked politician, he is one who will say anything to get elected. Selling out the nation of Israel would be just like him.

So while Dhimmi Carter goes to Lebanon and Obama lies to the American people about his past, his intentions and his true nature, the nation of Israel will hold their breath and pray. Pray that Obama never becomes President of the United States. For his ideal solution to the problems there is to finish the job Hitler started.

Sea Turtles

Hat Tip to Jewish Odysseus

Funny how we didn't hear from PETA, or any other animal rights groups when a group of Palestinians slaughtered a Sea Turtle while lookers on danced and shouted in glee at the macabre sight. Claiming that the meat is a cure for asthma (doubtful since science doesn't support it) and maybe they were a bit hungry, killing that endangered animal was cruel. As you can see from the video below:



Contrast that with this bit of environmental news.

Israel released 3 Sea Turtles to the wild after rehabilitation.

Three sea turtles were released into the wild yesterday from the fishing dock at Jisr al-Zarka, after being rehabilitated at the turtle rescue center in Mikhmoret. Fishermen and pupils from area schools were on hand to bid the turtles farewell.

The video gets a little rowdy (we're talking about school children) and noisy, but there is great joy in the air. The joy that comes with saving lives, not taking them. Even if the lives they save are turtles.


Watch video here


Palestinians kill life for selfish reasons. Israelis protect life because it is sacred to them. A big difference in the philosophies of the 2 people, isn't it?

“Report: Troubling texts at Va. Islamic school”- Violence against unbelievers, us

CAIR and other so-called moderate Muslim groups claim that Muslim schools in America are not teaching hatred and violence towards non-Muslims. But now the truth has finally emerged.

From the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

Last fall, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom asked the U.S. Department of State to secure the release of all Arabic-language textbooks used at a Saudi government school in Northern Virginia, the Islamic Saudi Academy (ISA). The Commission took this action in order to ensure that the books be publicly examined to determine whether the texts used at the ISA promote violence, discrimination, or intolerance based on religion or belief. The ISA is unlike any conventional private or parochial school in the United States in that it is operated by a foreign government and uses that government’s official texts. It falls under the Commission’s mandate to monitor the actions of foreign governments in relation to religious freedom. The government of Saudi Arabia, as a member of the international community, is committed to upholding international standards, including the obligation not to promote violence, intolerance, or hate.


In July 2006, the Saudi government confirmed to the U.S. government that, among other policies to improve religious freedom and tolerance, it would, within one to two years, “revise and update textbooks to remove remaining references that disparage Muslims or non-Muslims or that promote hatred toward other religions or religious groups.” The Commission is releasing this statement as the two-year timeframe is coming to an end, and with particular concern over the content of textbooks used at the ISA, in order to highlight reforms that should be made before the 2008-09 school year begins at the ISA.

Now mind you that these textbooks are also used in Public Schools in the United States.
Schools in Dearborn, MI and Brooklyn, NY. These textbooks are widely distributed to schools and mosques for the use of children.

A Small Example of Problematic Passage in Current ISA Textbooks

In a twelfth-grade Tafsir (Koranic interpretation) textbook, the authors state that it is permissible for a Muslim to kill an apostate (a convert from Islam), an adulterer, or someone who has murdered a believer intentionally: “He (praised is He) prohibits killing the soul that God has forbidden (to kill) unless for just cause…” Just cause is then defined in the text as “unbelief after belief, adultery, and killing an inviolable believer intentionally.” (Tafsir, Arabic/Sharia, 123)

A twelfth-grade Tawhid (monotheism) textbook states that “[m]ajor polytheism makes blood and wealth permissible,” which in Islamic legal terms means that a Muslim can take the life and property of someone believed to be guilty of this alleged transgression with impunity. (Tawhid, Arabic/Sharia, 15) Under the Saudi interpretation of Islam, “major polytheists” include Shi’a and Sufi Muslims, who visit the shrines of their saints to ask for intercession with God on their behalf, as well as Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists.

“Today, Qadyanis [Ahmadis] are one of the greatest strongholds for spreading aberration, deviation, and heresy in the name of religion, even from within Islamic countries. Thus, the Qadyani [Ahmadi] movement has become a force of destruction and internal corruption today in the Islamic world…” (“Aspects of Muslim Political and Cultural History,” Eleventh Grade, Administrative/Social Track, Sharia/Arabic Track, 99)

“It [Baha’ism] is one of the destructive esoteric sects in the modern age... It has become clear that Babism [the precursor to Baha’ism], Baha’ism, and Qadyanism [Ahmadism] represent wayward forces inside the Islamic world that seek to strike it from within and weaken it. They are colonial pillars in our Islamic countries and among the true obstacles to a renaissance.” (“Aspects of Muslim Political and Cultural History,” Eleventh Grade, 99-100)

“The cause of the discord: The Jews conspired against Islam and its people. A sly, wicked person who sinfully and deceitfully professed Islam infiltrated (the Muslims). He was ‘Abd Allah b. Saba’ (from the Jews of Yemen). [___]* began spewing his malice and venom against the third of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, ‘Uthman (may God be pleased with him), and falsely accused him.” (Tawhid, Administrative/Social Sciences Track, 67)
(*The word or words here were obscured by correction fluid.)

Sunni Muslims are told to “shun those who are extreme regarding the People of the House (Muhammad’s family) and who claim infallibility for them.” (Tawhid, Arabic/Sharia 82; Tawhid, Administrative/Social Sciences Track, 65) This would include all Shi’a Muslims, for whom the doctrine of infallibility is a cardinal principle.

A ninth-grade Hadith textbook states: “It is not permissible to violate the blood, property, or honor of the unbeliever who makes a compact with the Muslims. The blood of the mu’ahid is not permissible unless for a legitimate reason…the mu’ahid is an unbeliever who contracts a treaty with a Muslim providing for the safety of his life, property, and family.” (Hadith, Ninth Grade, 142-3)

“In these verses is a call for jihad, which is the pinnacle of Islam. In (jihad) is life for the body; thus it is one of the most important causes of outward life. Only through force and victory over the enemies is there security and repose. Within martyrdom in the path of God (exalted and glorified is He) is a type of noble life-force that is not diminished by fear or poverty.” (Tafsir, Arabic/Sharia, 68)

Just a small sample of the multitude of problems in these textbooks. And we are suppose to accept this form of hate-mongering. Not to do so would make the US seem Islamaphobic. Again the Muslim community tries to pull the wool over our eyes. And they almost succeeded.

The Commission has long called for Saudi Arabia to be designated a “country of particular concern,” or CPC, for its egregious and systematic violations of religious freedom. In particular, the Commission has expressed concern about the promotion of religious intolerance and religion-based violence in official Saudi government textbooks used both within Saudi Arabia and at Saudi schools abroad, such as the ISA. The Commission has been urging the U.S. government to press the Saudi government to promote religious tolerance in the Saudi curriculum since 2001, and in 2003 it issued an in-depth report about religious freedom conditions in Saudi Arabia, including intolerance and incitement to violence found in Saudi textbooks and the country’s official educational curriculum. It was not until September 2004 that the State Department first publicly expressed concern over the Saudi government’s “export of religious extremism and intolerance to other countries” at a press conference announcing Saudi Arabia’s CPC designation.

While neither the ISA nor the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia complied with the Commission’s requests to release the school’s books publicly, the Commission did obtain some Arabic-language books currently used in the twelfth grade and a random selection of texts currently used in middle and high school classes. The Commission’s review of these textbooks found that they did contain passages justifying violence toward, and even the killing of, apostates and so-called polytheists. The texts also include highly intolerant passages about non-Sunni Muslims, such as Shi’a, Ismailis, and Ahmadis, and non-Muslims, such as Jews and Baha’is. A list of the books reviewed is appended to this statement.

You have to wonder at the time what they were hiding. Why do Muslims need to hide their textbooks from the government? What don't they want the US citizens to know? Many of these books are used in Public Schools, paid for by US Taxpayers. And the US Taxpayers have a right to know what is being taught in American Schools.

The Commission reiterates its recommendations that the State Department should:

make available all textbooks that it has received from the Saudi government, so that their content and compliance with international human rights standards can be assessed; and promptly create a formal mechanism to monitor and encourage implementation of the Saudi government’s 2006 policies as part of every meeting of the U.S.-Saudi Arabia Strategic Dialogue, and ensure that U.S. representatives to each relevant Working Group of the Strategic Dialogue, after each session, or at least every six months, report the group’s findings to Congress.

That's the least that the State Department should do. What should be done is to close the school as a cesspool of hatred and bigotry. And to go into every Public School in the US that uses Saudi textbooks and remove them immediately. And if necessary, close those public schools that refuse to cooperate. These administrators have to be forced to the realization that they are being paid by all the American taxpayers. And that the American taxpayers will not pay for hate mongering in any form.

Textbooks reviewed:

Monotheism (Tawhid), Twelfth Grade, Administrative, Social, Natural, and Technical Sciences Track

Monotheism (Tawhid), Twelfth Grade, Sharia and Arabic Sciences Track

Interpretation (Tafsir), Twelfth Grade, Sharia and Arabic Sciences Track

Interpretation (Tafsir), Twelfth Grade, Administrative, Social, Natural, and Technical Sciences Track

Hadith and Islamic Culture, Twelfth Grade, Administrative, Social, Natural, and Technical Sciences Track

Hadith and Islamic Culture, Twelfth Grade, Sharia and Arabic Sciences Track

Jurisprudence (Fiqh), Twelfth Grade, Natural Sciences Track

Jurisprudence (Fiqh), Twelfth Grade, Sharia and Arabic Sciences Track

The History of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Twelfth Grade, Natural Sciences Track

Sociology, Twelfth Grade, Sharia and Arabic Sciences Track

Studies from the Islamic World, Twelfth Grade, Administrative, Social, Natural, and Technical Sciences Track

Hadith, Seventh Grade

Hadith, Ninth Grade

Jurisprudence (Fiqh), Ninth Grade

Jurisprudence (Fiqh), Tenth Grade

Aspects of Muslim Political and Cultural History, Eleventh Grade, Administrative and Social Track, Sharia and Arabic Track

History of the Prophets, the Prophet’s Biography, and the Spread of Islam, Tenth Grade