yeah.
Posted on 06/19/2007 2:02:13 AM PDT by Man50D
JERUSALEM – Christians can continue living safely in the Gaza Strip only if they accept Islamic law, including a ban on alcohol and on women roaming publicly without proper head coverings, an Islamist militant leader in Gaza told WND in an exclusive interview.
The militant leader said Christians in Gaza who engage in "missionary activity" will be "dealt with harshly."
The threats come two days after a church and Christian school in Gaza was attacked following the seizure of power in the territory by the Hamas terror group.
"I expect our Christian neighbors to understand the new Hamas rule means real changes. They must be ready for Islamic rule if they want to live in peace in Gaza," said Sheik Abu Saqer, leader of Jihadia Salafiya, an Islamic outreach movement that recently announced the opening of a "military wing" to enforce Muslim law in Gaza.
Jihadia Salafiya is suspected of attacking a United Nations school in Gaza last month, after the school allowed boys and girls to participate in the same sporting event. One person was killed in that attack.
"The situation has now changed 180 degrees in Gaza," said Abu Saqer, speaking from Gaza yesterday.
"Jihadia Salafiya and other Islamic movements will ensure Christian schools and institutions show publicly what they are teaching to be sure they are not carrying out missionary activity. No more alcohol on the streets. All women, including non-Muslims, need to understand they must be covered at all times while in public," Abu Asqer told WND.
"Also the activities of Internet cafes, pool halls and bars must be stopped," he said. "If it goes on, we'll attack these things very harshly."
Abu Saqer accused the leadership of the Gaza Christian community of "proselytizing and trying to convert Muslims with funding from American evangelicals."
"This missionary activity is endangering the entire Christian community in Gaza," he said.
Abu Saqer claimed there was "no need" for the thousands of Christians in Gaza to maintain a large number of institutions in the territory.
About 2,000 Christians live in the Gaza Strip, which has a population of over 1 million.
Abu Saqer said Hamas "must work to impose an Islamic rule or it will lose the authority it has and the will of the people."
His comments come after gunmen Sunday attacked Gaza's Latin Church and adjacent Rosary Sisters School, reportedly destroying crosses, bibles, pictures of Jesus and furniture and equipment. The attackers also stole a number of computers.
The attack was the first targeting of Christian institutions since Hamas last week staged a coup against the rival Fatah party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, seizing all Fatah positions and security compounds, essentially taking complete control of the Gaza Strip.
Hamas officials in Gaza claimed to WND Fatah was behind Sunday's church attack in an attempt to discredit Hamas to the international community.
Abu Saqer claimed he had "good information" the attack actually was a robbery aimed at the church's school computers, even though Bibles and Christian holy objects were destroyed.
Christians, secular institutions targeted
Israel evacuated the Gaza Strip in 2005. Since then, there have been a slew of attacks there against Christians and non-Muslims.
A month before the U.N. school was targeted, Palestinians bombed a Christian book store in Gaza reportedly funded by American Protestants that exclusively sold Christian books. Two nearby Internet cafes also were bombed.
At the time, Abu Saqer, who didn't take credit for the attack, told WND the Christian bookstore was "proselytizing and attempting to convert our people."
"As a principle, we believe that Jews and Christians will always do everything in order to keep Muslims far from their religion," Abu Saqer said.
Even before Hamas took over Gaza last week, some analysts here called the recent bombings of secular and Christian institutions in the territory indications Hamas may be seeking to impose Islamic rule on the Palestinian population.
Israeli officials said Hamas in 2005 established hard-line Islamic courts and created the Hamas Anti-Corruption Group, described as a kind of "morality police" operating within Hamas' organization. Hamas has denied the existence of the group, but it recently carried out a high-profile "honor killing" widely covered by the Palestinian media.
A Hamas-run council in the West Bank came under international criticism last year when it barred an open-air music and dance festival, declaring it was against Islam.
'West can learn from Islamic values'
In response to the uproar, Hamas chief in Gaza and former foreign minister Mahmoud al-Zahar told WND in a recent interview: "I hardly understand the point of view of the West concerning these issues. The West brought all this freedom to its people but it is that freedom that has brought about the death of morality in the West. It's what led to phenomena like homosexuality, homelessness and AIDS."
Asked if Hamas is seeking to impose hard-line Islamic law on the Palestinians, al-Zahar responded, "The Palestinian people are Muslim people, and we do not need to impose anything on our people because they are already committed to their faith and religion. People are free to choose their way of life, their way of dress and behavior."
Al-Zahar said his terror group, which demands strict dress codes for females, respects women's rights.
"It is wrong to think that in our Islamic society there is a lack of rights for women. Women enjoy their rights. What we have, unlike the West, is that young women cannot be with men and have relations outside marriage. Sometimes with tens of men. This causes the destruction of the family institution and the fact that many kids come to the world without knowing who are their fathers or who are their mothers. This is not a modern and progressed society," al-Zahar explained.
The terror chieftain told WND the West can learn from his group's Islamic values.
"Here I refer to what was said in the early '90s by Britain's Prince Charles at Oxford University. He spoke about Islam and its important role in morality and culture. He said the West must learn from Islam how to bring up children properly and to teach them the right values."
Evac every Jew and Christian from the Middle East and then turn the whole thing into a glowing, irradiated wasteland. Well I can hope can’t I?
It's a Religion of Peace, don'tcha know...
it’s only the peace lovin muzzie terrorists...tolerant of all religions and supporters of all life...doing what they do best....
your idea does seem to make sense....when something is infested with lice/cock roaches, etc....a little RAID does wonders!!!!
Same story...different century.
And the left is fond of saying that it is only a few radical islamists who are responsible for murder, death and destruction. LIARS!
Why in the world to they want women to be covered ? That I dont understand. Women are precious beautiful creations of God, why do they treat them like dogs who need dog tags ?
I'll give him that. The West will need to employ the services of a genius PR firm to peddle our debased, absurd conception of the family.
Ilike the Genghis Khan solution for dealing with Muslims - saves a lot of gried.
Too bad the west didn;t jopin with the Mongols against the Mulsims back in the Middle Ages as they had requested. Moham-Mad would only be a chapter in a history book, instead of the father of many nutjobs.
The theory is that exposed women awake lustful feelings in men, tempting them to sin. Christianity has long required that women be covered as well, with the same purpose. It is only a recent development of predominantly secular culture that allows for the public exposure and glorification of the exposure of women’s bodies.
I don’t understand your comment. Are you saying that Hamas is not one of the most radical of Islamist groups?
In a way, this is good. The radical Islamists claim that when they take over and institute Sharia law, the culture will become a model for the whole world to envy and want to emulate. It seems to me that just the opposite occurs, that the people flee, or feel oppression, and want to change the regime.
We need C R U S A D E !
LLS
Recall that it was Hamas’ “anti-corruption” rallying cry that got them elected over Fatah (both Hamas and Fatah promoted themselves as anti-Israel, with only arguments on this score being differences on the best strategy for eliminating the Jews). Note that Europe and the US are now throwing their support back behind Fatah, due to its ejection from Gaza, and the risk of further encroachments by Hamas in the West Bank area.
This is the behavior pattern that has created a growing base of support for the programs of the various factions who dream of re-establishing the Khalifate, recovering “lost” Islamic territories from Spain to the Balkans, and then resuming the assault on the lands of the infidels. Meanwhile, in Saudi Arabia .... as Islamist shill Eric Margolis gloats:
“Anyone who wants to understand what really goes on in the Mideast should have a look at the scandal that erupted earlier this month over the outsized character of Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia.
Bandar has long been a renowned mover, shaker, and charmer. As Saudi ambassador to the US, the influential Bandar schmoozed official Washington for two decades. He became an intimate of the Bush family. He invested a least $60 million in Saudi funds in the Carlyle Corp., in which the Bush family has important interests. Equally significant, Prince Bandar was a particular favorite at the CIA, where he was long considered one of its prime Mideast “assets.”
Bandar flew in his own personal Airbus A-340 painted in the colors of his favorite US football team, and threw lavish parties in his $135 million Aspen house and in Washington. He was Mr. SaudiAmerica. Congress, the media, and the rest of official Washington hailed Bandar as the kind of “good Arab” with whom the US was happy to do business.
After leaving Washington, Bandar returned home to become the highly influential head of national security and chief foreign policy advisor to Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah. Bandar’s father, Crown Prince Sultan, is the nation’s powerful defense minister and next in line to the throne. Many Saudi observers believed Bandar was being positioned to sit one day on the throne of Saudi Arabia.
On top of all this, Bandar is also a marketing genius.
The UK Guardian newspaper and BBC recently revealed that Bandar personally received over US $2 billion in “marketing fees” from the British defense firm BAE as part of the huge, 1985 al-Yamamah arms deal. Al-Yamamah means dove in Arabic. Charges of massive corruption over the Al-Yamamah deal have swirled for years. But even for the rich Saudis, $2 billion is a lot of money. That’s twice what Washington’s most important Arab ally, Egypt, was given.
For the Saudi royals, Britain’s outgoing PM Tony Blair, and Washington, the “dove” and Bandar’s $2 billion worth of payola have become one big albatross.
During the 1980’s, Saudi Arabia sought to buy modern US warplanes. But the US pro-Israel lobby blocked the sale, costing the loss of billions in sales by US industry and 100,000 American jobs. The Reagan Administration advised the Saudis to go buy their warplanes from Britain.
Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was only too happy have the British defense firm, known today as BAE, sell the Saudis 120 Tornado strike aircraft, Hawk trainers, military equipment, and lucrative training and maintenance programs worth some $90–100 billion and the 100,000 jobs America lost. Over their operational lives of 20 or so years, warplanes consume six times their original cost in spare parts. These supply contract also went to BAE and other British industrial firms.
The Saudis could barely operate the modern military equipment they bought from the US, Britain, and France. Their military forces were a big zero. Most of it stayed in storage, or was operated by foreign mercenaries. The Saudi arms deals were really about buying military protection from the western powers.
All arms sales to the west’s Mideast clients routinely include 10–15% “commissions” to heads of state, generals, and their cronies. These funds are traditionally channeled through middlemen, the flamboyant Adnan Kashoggi being the most notorious.
Kickbacks, rechristened “marketing fees,” were of course expected in the Al-Yamamah deal. But Bandar’s $2 billion set a record for size and venality. Thatcher ordered Bandar’s payments carefully hidden from public gaze. They remained so until recent years when British and American government investigators began questioning secret, multi-million dollar payments to Prince Bandar routed from the UK to the shady Riggs Bank in Washington. Before it was shut down after a series of scandals, Riggs had become one of the favorite handlers of “black” money for pro-US autocratic regimes.
When Britain’s Serious Fraud Office began probing BAE’s secret payoffs to Bandar, Tony Blair sanctimoniously ordered the investigation shut down for “national security” reasons. The Saudis threatened to cancel their arms deals with Britain if payoff charges were made public by HM’s government. Blair was trying to sell the Saudis BAE’s new, high-tech Eurofighter. He blocked similar investigations by OECD, the international anti-bribery watchdog agency which was also closing in on the Saudi money trail.
Bandar denies any wrongdoing, claiming the “marketing” funds all went into a legitimate Defense Ministry account and were properly accounted for and audited.
Few believe him. The only “marketing” effort in the arms deal was payola to high Saudi officials. If the funds were legit, why all the secrecy and money laundering? Were the payments simply western “baksheesh” for Bandar and his clan? Were they to help him against his main power rival, Prince Turki Faisal, who is not seen as amenable to US and British interests as Bandar?
Could the billions have been used for covert operations, possibly with US participation? One recalls the Reagan years when money from Israel’s secret sales of US arms to Iran were used to finance the Nicaraguan Contras.
The most significant effect of this revolting scandal is being felt in the Muslim world. One of the major reasons for the fast-spreading influence of militant Islamic groups like Hezbullah, Hamas, and Taliban has been their success in uprooting the Muslim world’s endemic corruption and nepotism. We are so used to Islamists being demonized as “terrorists” that their highly effective and popular social accomplishments are rarely noted. In fact, their appeal and popularity is based primarily on their welfare and incorruptibility.
Islamic militants insist the west exploits their nations by keeping deeply corrupt regimes in power. In exchange for protection from their own people and neighbors, and fabulous wealth, these authoritarian Arab regimes – always termed “moderates” by western media – sell oil on the cheap to the west and do its bidding. US-installed governments in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Somalia, and Afghanistan are all noted for egregious corruption, including secret payoffs from Washington to their leaders.
No wonder Prince Bandar was always so amiable and accommodating. Or that he managed to fly out a planeload of Saudis the day after 9/11 when all US flights were grounded. Or that the Bush administration was trying to position the always amenable prince as the next Saudi monarch.
The Bandar scandal is hugely embarrassing for Blair and Bush, who claim to be leading a crusade to bring democracy and good government to the benighted Muslim world. It starkly confirms Islamist’s accusations that the west promotes corruption. And it dramatically exposes the dirty underbelly of the west’s much-vaunted “special relationship” with the Saudi royal family.”
If every Jew and Christian were removed from Israel the country would return to a wasteland all by itself under Arab rule.
A look at those countries of the world under “Islamic Law” is not a good advertisment for Islamic Law.
See, secular culture gets at least some things right.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
A warning to the rest of the world of what we are up against, a cult from HELL.
It’s stories like this that make me wish we lived in a Christian nation which stood up for christians around the world, and attacked those who go after them.
Instead, we get on the wrong side of the fight, like in Kosovo.
Thanks Israel.
Ping!
Keep hoping, baby - I’m with you, as are many others.
I would alter that to read “evacuate every Jew and Christian from the ME,” then, put them on notice that since now ONLY the enemies of civilization live there, that the very first time any of their representatives attacks Israel and any Westerner, then both THEY and the enabling “leadership” in Iran, will be pinpointed for some very painful infrastructural strikes, WHICH WILL IRONICALLY PUT THEM BACK IN THE 7TH CENTURY THEY SO SLAVISHLY WORSHIP.
Now that would be poetic justice. They simply do not belong on Planet Earth in the 21st Century, and EVERY DAY they force the issue. Radical Islam reminds me of nothing so much as the global/cultural/religious version of “SUICIDE-BY-COP”. They are just ASKIN’ FOR IT, they are BEGGIN’ FOR IT. I say : GIVE it to them!!!!!!
If you run for President, I’m voting for you.
Dear Pali islamo-wankers:
Go take a flying frig at a rolling donut.
“I’m voting for you”
-——————————I have always appreciated “doctor vote”
Many of the militant Muslims are gay (this was, at least, reported among the Taliban). Their opinion of women is much the same as the Ancient Greeks: men for pleasure, women only for breeding.
Why in the world to they want women to be covered ? That I dont understand.
This is not particularly unusual among many religions, although some Islamic sects take it to the extreme. Many Christian denominations require modesty among women and there are some, such as the Amish, where women cover up more than some Islamic sects. At my wife’s old church any woman who wore anything even slightly low-cut or too short would be gossiped about and pressured to change.
In fact, there are any number of Christian denominations that also essentially ban alcohol. They won’t kill you if you for violations, but they will essentially shun you.
I believe that you are parroting Michael Moore propaganda in this sentence. I do not believe it happened. If you can come up with a credible reference, I would like to see it.
Typical panty waste punk threatens the women among just 2000 people. I’d like to punch him in the face so he would HAVE to wear a f*^king burka himself.
See http://www.historyofjihad.org/mongolia.html
I read it in other sources too, but can’t reacll specifically where.
Thw west should have helped him.
No, what I’m saying is that there are no “moderate” muslims. Death and destruction are all they know, and we certainly won’t be winning the WOT thinking that there are “moderates.”
“Or that he managed to fly out a planeload of Saudis the day after 9/11 when all US flights were grounded.”
‘I believe that you are parroting Michael Moore propaganda in this sentence. I do not believe it happened. If you can come up with a credible reference, I would like to see it.’
As I noted, this piece is by Islamist shill George Margolis, so you may very well be correct. However, note the following excerpt from an article by Daniel Pipes - - - hardly a “Michael Moore parroter”. Many additional interesting examples are cited as well:
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/995
The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations
by Daniel Pipes
National Interest
Winter 2002/03
- - - - - snip - - - - - -
The U.S. government’s weak policy can be seen in yet other areas: it does not fight for U.S. scholars or media to get access to the Kingdom; it does not challenge the Saudi refusal to allow American researchers to engage in archaeological excavations; and it provides scant assistance to those unfortunate Americans who get caught up in the Saudi legal system (for something as minor as a fender-bender).
In contrast-and this is a rich subject in its own right-the State Department and other agencies bend over backwards for the Kingdom, for example, going to great lengths to keep secret the specifics of its investments in the United States. And when Saudi nationals living in the United States get in trouble with the law (common charges include various forms of rowdiness, sexual harassment and keeping slaves), they are often granted diplomatic immunity to avoid prosecution, then whisked out of the country. For example, a former U.S. ambassador to Riyadh was dispatched by his Saudi bosses to Miami in April 1982 to keep a Saudi prince from being jailed for altercating with the police by winning him retroactive diplomatic immunity. Or after Princess Buniah al-Saud, a niece of King Fahd, faced charges of battery for having pushed her Indonesian maid down a flight of stairs in her Orlando, Florida house, the maid was conveniently denied a visa by the State Department to return to the United States to testify against the princess. More spectacular was the planeload of bin Ladens permitted to leave the United States immediately after September 11, 2001, before U.S. law enforcement officials could question them.”
- - - - snip - - - -
because they think women are evil or something weird like that.
addendum to post #36:
I’m not sure of the references behind this summary, but if you care to pursue the question further, it might be helpful (the original has active links to these references):
September 13, 2001: Saudi Royals Fly to Kentucky in Violation of Domestic Flight Ban
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=bush_administration
After a complete air flight ban in the US began during the 9/11 attacks, some commercial flights begin resuming this day. However, all private flights are still banned from flying. Nonetheless, at least one private flight carrying Saudi royalty takes place on this day. And in subsequent days, other flights carry royalty and bin Laden family members. These flights take place even as fighters escort down three other private planes attempting to fly. Most of the Saudi royals and bin Ladens in the US at the time are high school or college students and young professionals. [New York Times, 9/30/2001; Vanity Fair, 10/2003] The first flight is a Lear Jet that leaves from a private Raytheon hangar in Tampa, Florida, and takes three Saudis to Lexington, Kentucky. [Tampa Tribune, 10/5/2001] This flight apparently takes place several hours after a private meeting between President Bush and Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the US. Some think the idea of the flights were approved at that meeting (see September 13, 2001). For two years, this violation of the air ban is denied by the FAA, FBI, and White House, and decried as an urban legend except for one article detailing them in a Tampa newspaper. [Tampa Tribune, 10/5/2001] Finally, in 2003, counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke confirms the existence of these flights, and Secretary of State Powell confirms them as well. [MSNBC, 9/7/2003; Vanity Fair, 10/2003] However, the White House remains silent on the matter. [New York Times, 9/4/2003] Officials at the Tampa International Airport finally confirm this first flight in 2004. But whether the flight violated the air ban or not rests on some technicalities that remain unresolved. [Lexington Herald-Leader, 6/10/2004] The Saudis are evacuated to Saudi Arabia over the next several days (see September 14-19, 2001).
Entity Tags: Bandar bin Sultan, Bin Laden Family, Federal Aviation Administration, Bush administration, Richard A. Clarke, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Colin Powell
Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline
Your post 38 is interesting, but it does not support the above statement. Indeed it directly contradicts it. No plane load of Saudis flew on 9/12, nor did any Saudis get permission to leave the country via aircraft on that day. The article even specifies that much of the “information” in your original post is speculation, and that there is no clear evidence that the flights violated the conditions of the flight ban.
I believe that the Saudis do have considerable influence in the United States Government. So would any country that is at least nominally an ally and which controls such a huge proportion of the current oil supply. Whether this interest is to the detriment of the country can be argued over, but it is not clear to me that the current administration is doing anything other than honestly trying to preserve American interests as they see it to the best of their ability.
I disagree with them over spending, the immigration issue, and a host of issues, but I think it is important to focus on facts. There is a huge difference between noting that some Saudis were allowed to leave the country with due process a few days after 9/11, and inferring that the President gave special treatment as part of a conspiracy to cover up the facts of 9/11.
Sorry, my mistake. Your original post only talked about Prince Bandar’s influence and “Corruption”. It never inferred that the President tried to cover up facts of 9/11.
There is no question that Prince Bandar is influential. Whether he is corrupt or not depends on the definition of corruption. I do not think that there is any doubt that he is doing the bidding of the government of Saudi Arabia.
How would the muslims like THAT statment?
Then why do they throw homosexuals from rooftops or cause walls to fall on them?
No, it is God-rejecting liberalism that has brought about the death of morality in the West.
Not freedom.
2 Corinthinans 3:17:
17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
It is leftists, who work tirelessly to remove God from any public sphere and install in God's place every kind of moral depravity that the mind of man can imagine, that kill freedom and establish oppression and slavery and misery. It is not America's freedom, for which people will float across the ocean on plywood to live in, but America's liberals that have destroyed our morals, and many of our freedoms, in this country.
Because they think it will trick people into thinking they’re not gay. You might think I’m making this whole thing up, but do some searching re: the taliban and the huge demand for...butt boys. There were some news stories about this around the time of the DC snipers (who, incidentally, were also gay muslims...but gay, black, and muslim are three protected classes, so those articles didn’t last long). Outwardly they condemn homosexuality. Yet culturally it is rampant. I think they have the same philosophy as the Romans/Greeks—i.e., if you aren’t the one “receiving” then you aren’t actually gay. Thus old dirty militant muslims can have their boys and “not be gay.”
A warning to the rest of the world of what we are up against, a cult from HELL”
Please keep repeating that sentence at every opportunity.
I still have people I talk to that think I am over the edges with my distrust of anything Muzzie.
There are a half dozen or so topics related to the recent (as opposed to 14 centuries of historical) oppression against Arab Christians, here’s one, with a link to another. Check the GAZA keyword for more.
Gaza’s Christians fear for their lives
Jerusalem Post | 6-18-07 | KHALED ABU TOAMEH
Posted on 06/18/2007 8:39:38 AM EDT by SJackson
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1852026/posts
Yeah, that's real Constitutional. Go to war over faith in regions of the world that weren't even to be protected by our Armed Forces.
No, it’s not constitutional. It’s just how I feel when I hear these stories.
“public exposure and the glorification of the exposure of
women’s bodies”
————well, that’s not really what’s happening.
It may be true that increasingly in the 20th-21st century the Western female seems to be “wearing less clothes”, it is NOT and NEVER HAS BEEN and NEVER WILL BE
a cultural imperative that women walk around in public with as few clothes on as possible, as it IS in the Islamic world that woman have as MANY clothes on as possible. If we were the exact opposite of them, our women would be 98% naked , just as theirs are 98% covered. That only happens in the West on the beach on a very hot day.
America at this particular point in our heated up Immigration debate period , seems a way less than ideal place for them to keep pushing their agenda of wanting us to accomodate their cultural requirements. The UK seems to be losing ground steadily, they simply can’t assert whatever they have left of “Englishness”. They need leadership NOW. And so do we, to start a process of deportation of undesirables, to start a process of divestment from presence in the Arab World IN ALL AREAS.
Leave them alone so they can kill themselves off the way they were doing before Saddam Hussein came along and decided he would kill off the ones he didn’t like.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.