Page 910«..1020..909910911912..920930..»

Ice Cube Will Speak At A Zionist Gala Following His Antisemitic Tweet – UPROXX

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Ice Cube has seen an abundance of controversy in the past few months. The rapper recently had to clarify that he wasnt a MAGA supporter after he was criticized by fans for working with the Trump administration. Cube was also flagged for sharing an antisemitic meme just a few weeks before that (which he later claimed was posted by a hacker). But it now looks like Cube is trying to smooth things over with a head-scratching gala appearance.

Cube has apparently been booked to headline the annual gala of the Zionist Organization Of America (ZOA) at the end of next month, according to NME. The virtual event will also see a speech from Jon Voight, who has similarly faced criticism for backing Trump.

The rappers appearance at the gala was secured after he formed a friendship with the ZOAs president Morton Klein. Cube and Klein were in contact following the rappers controversial tweet and the two apparently had a two-hour-long eye-opening conversation about the NAACP and civil rights. Klein detailed his chat with Cube in a tweet posted back in July. Along with mentioning the that two condemned racism and antisemitism in their chat, Klein said: Cube told me he thanked Jews for starting NAACP, many Black schools & fighting for Black civil rights.

Go here to see the original:
Ice Cube Will Speak At A Zionist Gala Following His Antisemitic Tweet - UPROXX

Zionists to build new 1,257 houses in occupied lands – Mehr News Agency – English Version

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Israeli regime on Sunday issued a tender for the construction of 1,257 settlement homes in the occupied East Jerusalem, Anadolu reported.

In 2014, Zionistsfroze a decision to build 2,600 housing units in the same settlement due to international pressure.

On Thursday, the Israeli regimeauthorities approved the construction of 108 housing units in the Ramat Shlomo settlement in East Jerusalem.

According to Haaretz newspaper, the regime plans to approve thousands of settlement units in East Jerusalem as a pre-empt step before the inauguration of US President-elect Joe Biden on Jan. 20.

Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris stated in their electoral campaign that they would abide by the two-state solution to solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, a solution that contradicts with the Zionist's settlement activity and Israeli regimeplans to annex parts of the occupied West Bank.

The West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is regarded as an "occupied territory" under international law, thus making all Jewish settlements there illegal.

MNA/PR

Original post:
Zionists to build new 1,257 houses in occupied lands - Mehr News Agency - English Version

Qatari Journalist: Normalization With Israel Furthers Zionist Goal Of World Domination – Middle East Media Research Institute

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Following the normalization agreements signed recently by Israel with the UAE and Bahrain, Qatari journalist Jaber Muhammad Al-Marri published an antisemitic column in the daily Al-Sharq, claiming that the agreement serves the Zionists' goal of taking over the world and warning Arab countries to resist the any attempts by the UAE to seduce them into signing similar agreements with Israel. To illustrate the cunning of the Jews, Al-Marri told the story of a rabbi who showed one of the kings of France how the weak Jewish rooster defeated its enemies, the strong roosters: he let them exhaust one another and then subdued the last remaining rooster, who by that time was tired and bleeding. Al-Marri added that the strategy employed by Israel in the peace agreements with the Arab countries proves that the Jews are no different from their descriptions in the Quran as violators of agreements who aspire to sow destruction and corruption throughout the world.

(Source: Alarab.co.uk, August 18, 2013)

The following are translated excerpts from the article:[1]

"They say that one of the kings of France heard that there was a Jewish rabbi who predicted that one day the Jews would rule the world. The king summoned him and said to him, 'You who are oppressed throughout the world and scattered among the countries, how could you take over the world? Give me some proof [of what you say].' The rabbi replied: 'If you will permit me, your highness, I will ask the ministers and the princes of your kingdom to arrange a cockfight, and for my part I will bring my rooster, who will defeat all the others!' The king was impressed by the Jewish rabbi's confidence, but wanted to [hear] the end [of the story] and to see how the Jews would take over the world, so he agreed to the rabbi's request and commanded all the ministers and princes to each bring a strong rooster to the cockpit so that the gamecocks could fight each other and he could verify the Jewish rabbi's words and pretentious claims.

"Three days later the fight was held. The ministers and princes brought their roosters. The Jewish rabbi arrived with a weak and scrawny cock and place him in the ring along with the others. A fight commenced among the strong roosters, but the rabbi's rooster hid and stayed far away from the fighting, leaving the strong cocks to battle each other until one had beaten all the rest. This rooster [now] stood victorious and swaggered around the ring, [but] his body was exhausted and wearied by the fighting and bleeding. Suddenly, the rabbi's thin and weak rooster emerged, approached the victorious but worn-out cock, leapt at its head, pecked at it forcefully and killed it. [That is how] the rabbi's scrawny rooster won. The Jewish rabbi stood up overjoyed, and said to the king, 'Do you see how we will take over the world?'

"This is the strategy that the Zionist entity employs against our 'mighty' Arab states. The Zionist rooster is scrawny, weak, and bereft of feathers, but he is exempt from every battle with the Arab cocks. [The latter] fight over the chickenfeed in anticipation of the Arab rooster who will achieve first place and win a meeting with the golden Jewish rooster, who spares no effort to drag him into protracted peace negotiations. During [these negotiations] the Arab rooster will share the chickenfeed of his brothers, the Arab roosters, with the Jewish rooster, whose feathers have re-grown and is no longer plucked clean.

"We have not, and [apparently] will not learn our lesson from our past wars with the Zionist entity and from the surrender agreements we signed with [the Zionists] since the Camp David Accords [between Egypt and Israel], the Oslo Accords, and the Araba Peace Treaty [between Israel and Jordan], which proved that the Zionists will never deviate from their description in the Quran as violators of agreements and treaties who constantly strive to [spread] fitna, destruction and corruption in the world. Do the propagandists of surrender fully understand the lessons of the past, or can it be that their hearts are sealed against [these lessons] and we cannot expect honor or good deeds from them?!

"If only the Zionist Arabs could be satisfied with this, and refrain from hurting their religion, their lineage and their principles. But it has come to the point where they harm the countries which have preserved their original identity, their principles and their critical decision not to recognize the Zionist entity, not to normalize relations with it and to demand the establishment of a Palestinian state whose capital is Jerusalem. It seems as though the [Arab] countries that have become Zionist are saying openly, without shame, 'There is no choice but for everyone to become Zionists and renounce their principles,' and make peace [with Israel] in return for nothing but peace, which is what Israel wants, otherwise we [the pro-Israel Arab states] will serve as 'Israel's stick' in the region and [punish] whoever refuses.

"We are at the dawn of the age of sickening Arab 'Zionization' led by the wicked neighbor the UAE [in an attempt] to seduce additional Arab states to normalize their relations with the Zionist entity."

[1] Al-Sharq (Qatar), September 22, 2020.

See the article here:
Qatari Journalist: Normalization With Israel Furthers Zionist Goal Of World Domination - Middle East Media Research Institute

Zionist Left and the PLO Flag: A Troubling Episode – The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Photo Credit: Tomer Neuberg/FLASH90

Flags mean something. Countries, states and even terrorist organizations design their flags to make a statement about their history, values or aspirations.

On the other end of the moral spectrum, the Nazis adopted the swastika because they believed it was connected to Aryan history. Hezbollahs flag features the slogan Party of Allah and an assault rifle. The PLO and its governing arm, the Palestinian Authority, have used a number of emblems over the years. One features a map of all of Israelnot just the disputed territories, but all of Israelacross which are the words, Palestine from the river to the sea, in Arabic.

A maple leaf may not convey a particularly powerful message. But a map asserting that all of Israel is really Palestine and needs to be conquered sends a very powerful message to the Palestinian Arab public. When the ruling P.A. regime displays such a map, it is telling Palestinian Arabs what their goal should be.

The Oslo Accords required the PLO and P.A. to cease their hate propaganda, including symbols that promote violence or the goal of destroying the State of Israel. I thought that groups on the Zionist left, such as Partners for Progressive Israel (PPI), supported the Oslo agreements.

So my colleagues and I at Herut North America were deeply disappointed when we discovered thatPPIhad reproduced the P.A.s destroy-Israel emblem in the guide for its recent series of educational seminars, Israel Symposium 2020: Beautiful Dream, Painful Reality. The symbol was used to illustrate thePPIs virtual meeting with P.A. officials. ThePPIdid not include any explanation of what the Arabic words mean or what the map symbolizes.

In early September, we expressed concern aboutPPIs action. In communications with our fellow Zionists, we pointed out that the publication of this PLO symbol of hate could have served as an important educational purpose if it had been accompanied by explanatory text. However, thePPIs text did not do that.

On the contrary, it misleadingly referred to the P.A. favoring a two-state solution. The map represents the very opposite of a two-state solution. It represents, in its own words, the goal of establishing Palestine from the river to the seathat is, in place of Israel.

Objecting to the reproduction of the PLOs hate map should not be a partisan issue. Palestinian Arab violence has never distinguished between left-wing and right-wing Jews. We pointed out that many of the Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism have been associated with organizations that are part of, or related, to the parties and factions that make up Partners for Progressive Israel.

For example, it was under that banner and symbol of hate that PLO terrorists murdered Hashomer Hatzair veteran and Arab-Jewish coexistence activist Alexander Arad near Kibbutz Ramot Menashe on Rosh Hashanah, Sept. 24, 1987. PLO terrorists also strangled and burned to death Mapam Youth activist Ziva Goldovsky near Ramallah on Aug. 13, 1988; gunned down five residents, including children aged 4 and 5, in Kibbutz Metzer, a Hashomer Hatzair kibbutz, on Nov. 10, 2002; and shot and stabbed to death 76-year-old Richard Lakin, an Americans for Peace Now activist from Connecticut, on a Jerusalem bus on Oct. 13, 2015.

We emphasized that we were not saying thatPPIor anybody else should be prevented from publishing the PLO emblem or censored in any way. We were not objecting to the reproduction of the P.A. flag in thePPIguide. We were not questioning the Zionist bona fides of thePPI.

All we were saying was that without fully explaining and translating the PLO hate symbol that appears in its booklet, thePPIis helping to mainstream that vile symbol and is, in effect, whitewashing the message of hate and violence that the symbol contains.

How did thePPIrespond to our expression of concern? First, it stalled. For more than two months, it refused to address the issue at all. Then last week, David Dormont of thePPIannounced that no reason exists forPPIto have to respond. He even characterized our question as harassment.

Its a sad day for American Jewry when a Zionist organization refuses to dialogue with a fellow Zionist organization. After years of American society being torn apart by rancor and rhetorical excesses, a new era is hopefully now dawning. American Zionists need to likewise turn over a new leaf, and embrace the values of tolerance and diversity of opinion. A legitimate question about an organizations actions should not be ignored, stonewalled or smeared as harassment, especially when the question concerns life-and-death issues for Israel and the Jewish people.

Read more from the original source:
Zionist Left and the PLO Flag: A Troubling Episode - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com

Unity, Mizrachi, and the legacy of Rabbi Sacks – The Jerusalem Post

Posted By on November 17, 2020

The wall-to-wall unity agreement reached at the recent 38th World Zionist Congress is not something to be taken for granted.Neither is the role World Mizrachi played in this unique achievement.A seismic shift took place in Israels National Institutions (NI) at this particular congress. For the first time in Zionist history, the majority of the 525 delegates from Israel and around the world were identified with the political and religious right wing of the Zionist movement.This could perhaps be likened to the 1977 revolution in Israeli politics, when Menachem Begin rose to power after 30 years of Labor leadership. For the first time, Israel had a right-wing prime minister and government. This gradually brought more religious and traditional elements of Israeli society into political leadership positions.A similar phenomenon has begun in the NI.The shift in numbers was the result of multiple factors: the size of the Likud Party, the strength of Mizrachis religious-Zionist global representation, and the joining of the new ultra-Orthodox Eretz HaKodesh delegation from America, to name but three.One tangible sign of this new reality is that the Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael-Jewish National Fund and the chairperson of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), are affiliated with the political and religious Right.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

Continue reading here:
Unity, Mizrachi, and the legacy of Rabbi Sacks - The Jerusalem Post

The Hebrew-Based Judaism And Zionism Of Eliezer Ben Yehuda – The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Photo Credit: Jewish Press

Eliezer Ben Yehuda (1858-1922), the Father of the Modern Hebrew Language, is almost single-handedly responsible for one of the greatest socio-linguistic events in world history: the revival of spoken Hebrew, which for millenia had been used only for Jewish prayer.

He accomplished this task at a time when not a single person conversed in Hebrew as his mother tongue, when the resurrection of a dead language had never occurred in all of human history, and when virtually no one else believed it possible. As one commentator pithily observed, before Ben Yehuda, Jews could speak Hebrew; after him, they did.

As a founding father of modern Zionism, Ben Yehuda was also a strong advocate of the right of the Jewish people to national self-determination, and he firmly believed that the creation of a Jewish state and the revival of the Hebrew language were inextricably connected. He explained that establishing Hebrew as the Jewish national language was the only way that olim arriving from the four corners of the earth could hope to communicate with each other. An inspiring speaker, he became recognized as an important voice of the Jewish nationalist movement.

Born Eliezer Yitzchak Perelman to an observant Lithuanian family (his father was a Chabad chassid), Ben Yehuda, showing signs of being a child prodigy and already well-versed in Torah and Talmud at age four, was sent to a yeshiva to become a rabbi. However, he later became attracted to the secular world, became a secularist, and completed his secular studies at Russian gymnasium (1877).

Nonetheless, after reading Daniel Deronda (1876), George Eliots final novel in which the renowned author laid out his passionate call for a homeland for the Jewish people, Ben Yehuda concluded that the European concept of national fulfillment should also be applied to the Jews and he began to plan for both his own aliyah and for the Jewish return to Eretz Yisrael.

He left Russia (1878), first going to Paris to study medicine (at the Sorbonne) so as to become more valuable to the Jewish community in Eretz Yisrael, but he was prevented from completing his studies due to tuberculosis and he left for Eretz Yisrael in 1881, settling in Jerusalem.

Few people know that one of his first projects upon making aliyah was printing the first Hebrew daily wall calendar (1885). He printed every Shabbat page in red, featured Jewish historical events on each page, and changed the date to reflect the number of years that have passed since the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash in Jerusalem (see featured correspondence, below).

Ben Yehudas plan for the rebirth of Hebrew emphasized spoken Hebrew at home. He and his first wife, Devora, pledged to speak only Hebrew to each other, and they decided to raise their son, Ben-Zion, as the first all-Hebrew speaking child in modern history. His fanaticism in this regard was such that when his wife was dying from tuberculosis and, in desperation, he smuggled his Russian-speaking mother in to help the family, he refused to let her speak so much as a word to his children.

When the Jewish public in Eretz Yisrael learned about his extremism in refusing to let his son even hear other languages, many believed that Ben-Zion would grow up to be a disabled idiot. Even famed Hebrew poets Yehuda Leib Gordon and Moshe Lilienblum believed that Hebrew would never again become a spoken language, and no less a personage than Herzl declared, after a meeting with Ben Yehuda, that the idea of Hebrew as the Jewish national tongue was ridiculous.

With a Hebrew-speaking child to raise, Ben Yehuda needed to find appropriate Hebrew words for the mundane things of everyday 19th century life; in fact, much of the inspiration for many of his everyday words came when his Hebrew-speaking young son would point to objects and ask, Mah zeh? Whats that?

He further appreciated that for modern Hebrew to become a truly functional language, it had to meet the needs of educated Jews and that there had to be a Hebrew vocabulary that included academic and scientific expression. Accordingly, he coined many hundreds of new words, thus facilitating both the development of modern Hebrew vocabulary and the naturalness of Hebrew expression.

Sadly, Ben Yehudas greatest and most vociferous opponents were the charedim who knew Hebrew best from their intense Biblical and Talmudic studies and were perhaps the best candidates to adopt Hebrew as a native language. They believed that it was sacrilegious to use lashon hakodesh (the holy tongue) for everyday mundane purposes.

In contrast, the religious Zionists agreed that Zionism and Hebrew are inseparable and quickly adopted teaching Hebrew in their yeshivot. To facilitate the ability of their teachers to teach in Hebrew, Ben Yehuda initiated the idea of teaching Hebrew using Hebrew (Ivrit bIvrit) and wrote several Hebrew textbooks for teaching secular subjects.

Ben Yehuda determined that the best way to disseminate his plan for the Jewish nation to communicate in Hebrew was through a newspaper even though there was not yet any Hebrew word for newspaper (or printer, subscriber, and the like). Accordingly, in 1884, he founded Hatvzi, his own weekly newspaper, and commenced printing a list of a few new Hebrew words in each issue. By the end of the 19th century, virtually every Jew in Eretz Yisrael could read and understand a Hebrew newspaper with little difficulty.

Hatvzi, however, generated great controversy as the result of the Shemittah Affair. A substitute editor ran an article urging farmers in Eretz Yisrael to obey the Biblical command to let the land lie fallow every seventh year, leading enraged farmers to argue that this would mean the end of the Jewish settlements, which were already struggling to eke out the first crops in two millennia from the infertile soil of Eretz Yisrael. Ben Yehuda sided with the farmers and published a renunciation of the article, arguing that the survival of the Jewish people and the establishment of Jewish settlements was more important, at least for now, than the laws of shemittah.

Not surprisingly, this move earned him even greater enmity from the charedim, whom he characterized as zealots. Ashkenazic rabbinic leaders pronounced a general ban on reading his newspaper, referred to him as a pagan and the great heretic, and pronounced writs of excommunication against him in their synagogues. However, through the support of less zealous Sephardic Jews, he was able to continue to print and disseminate his newspaper.

Ben Yehuda, though a secular Jew, had believed that the major obstacle to his goal of unifying all Jews through Hebrew was the separation indeed, the alienation of the charedi community from general society. Accordingly, to promote the unity of the Jewish people, he and his wife had become strictly observant, with him donning religious garb and growing out his beard and peyot and his wife covering her hair.

After the Shemittah Affair, however, he decided that outreach to the charedi community was futile and he abandoned any pretense of observance, thereby providing further ammunition for his charedi opponents to use against him.

Moreover, he began to publish articles demanding that charedi rabbis provide detailed accounts of all donations received and that, rather than continuing to live off the charity of others, they use the money to buy land for their yeshiva students to build homes and farms. He became extreme in his anti-religious outlook, even going so far as to officially register as a national Jew without religion.

The unsurprising result was even more bans and excommunication orders, the creation of a permanent rift between Ben Yehuda and the charedi community, and a material deterioration of his already challenged finances. Even when Devora got a much-needed position teaching Hebrew at one of Baron Rothschilds Alliance schools, she was summarily dismissed when the charedi leadership threatened to impose a general ban on the school.

The hatred for Ben Yehuda in zealot circles was such that plans were hatched to murder him; in fact, he barely escaped with his life during an attack on him in the Old City of Jerusalem. The charedim misrepresented his articles so as to incite the Turkish authorities against him, which resulted in a charge of sedition that carried a possible death sentence (he was ultimately sentenced to one year in prison). They even went so far as to attempt to physically block his wifes burial on the Mount of Olives and to celebrate his death as the Lords righteous revenge on a great sinner.

In this correspondence from Jerusalem dated 27 Elul 1897, Ben Yehuda writes to Gershom Bader that the charedim and anti-Zionist zealots are, sadly, more dangerous that our Gentile enemies:

It interests me very much to know the reason for the estrangement between the Zionists and many other people who also seem to be warm and loyal Chovevei Tzion (lovers of Zion). Truly, it disturbs me greatly that besides the battle against our Gentile enemies, we are required to fight against our zealot enemies, who are more dangerous than the former.

Gershom Bader (1868-1953) an important Eastern European Haskalah figure, political commentator, author, playwright, editor, and Hebrew, Yiddish, German, and Polish journalist was an enthusiastic supporter of Chibat Tzion and sharply critical of the pro-chassidic and conservative policies of the charedi community, sharing with Ben Yehuda a mutual disdain for the anti-Zionist charedi zealots.

Ben Yehudas financial salvation ultimately came in the form of an angel: the Nadiv Hayadua (the Well-Known Benefactor) Baron Edmond de Rothschild who, though deeply skeptical that Hebrew would ever again become a widely spoken language and who actually forbade teaching Hebrew in his schools in Eretz Yisrael nonetheless admired Ben Yehudas work and dedication. It was this support, and ambitious fundraising work by his wife, that enabled the poverty-stricken Ben Yehuda to continue to publish Hatzvi and to devote himself to working on his dictionary.

Ben Yehudas singular literary contribution may well be his dictionary for which, ironically, no Hebrew word existed. His main source of income was from subscriptions to Hatzvi, but that proved inadequate, not only for the development and sale of his dictionary, but even to provide for his family, so he had to rely on financial support from others.

Turning himself into a scientific lexicographer, he was determined that each word would have its roots in Biblical sources to the greatest possible extent. However, in many cases, there were no analogs, so he had to create new words from whole cloth.

He compiled his dictionary using strict philological rules, and the results of his arduous labor was his 17-volume A Complete Dictionary of Ancient and Modern Hebrew, which was carried forward by his second wife, Hemda (his first wifes sister), after his death and was not completed until 1958.

Exhibited here is probably the most incredible Ben Yehuda letter I have ever seen, a handwritten correspondence addressed to Nachum Sokolow, then editor of Ha-Tzfira in Jerusalem (1896):

Jerusalem, 20 Shevat 1896,

1,826 years since our exile [in the year 70 C.E.]

In a short while, the first leaves of my great work, Dictionary of the Hebrew Language, will come out of the printing press and I would be honored to send to you to review this sample and for you to let me know your thoughts on it, and if you find, as I hope you will, that it is appropriately worthy and deserving, you will give it positive mention in your beloved newspaper and will rouse the public to support (what is in my opinion) this precious treasure so that I may bring to light this great work which requires considerable funds to print it.

And now, I will ask you to do a great kindness for me and publish the attached advertisement several times in your newspaper. And I believe that for such an announcement, one should pay in full, but right now I am short and cannot act accordingly, and I request kindness from you, and your heart should be certain that I will, at every possible opportunity where I can serve you in any matter, I will do so willingly and with great joy. Alas, were I only financially able to pay for the advertisement and (I am not], G-d forbid, seeking a free gift.

With feelings of boundless grace and respect, I await your thoughts and judgment on my work.

In a P.S., Ben Yehuda adds a request to publish in Ha-Tzfira an advertisement for his newspaper, Hatzvi, to help defeat its major competitor, Ha-Chavatzelet which, he writes, is against Chibat Tzion, the early founding organization promoting aliyah and settlements in Eretz Yisrael.

To assist with his dictionary and to solve various problems of terminology, pronunciation, spelling, and punctuation, Ben Yehuda founded the Vaad Halashon (Hebrew Language Council, 1890), the forerunner of todays Hebrew Language Academy at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, currently the supreme arbiter and authority on approving new Hebrew words and passing on all matters pertaining to the Hebrew language.

The success of his endeavor was impliedly recognized by the British Mandate Authority when, on November 29, 1922 it recognized Hebrew as the official language of the Jews in Eretz Yisrael.

Read more:
The Hebrew-Based Judaism And Zionism Of Eliezer Ben Yehuda - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com

Pakistan PM Imran Khan Says Under Pressure to Recognise Israel, Insists on No Ties with ‘Zionists’ – News18

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan has said his government is under pressure to recognise Israel, insisting that Islamabad would never establish relations with the "Zionists".

Khan revealed this during an interview with a private television, where he stated that after the recognition of Israel by Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, Islamabad is also being asked to recognise Israel, something that his government has rejected till now.

"I have no second thought about recognising Israel unless there is a just settlement, which satisfies Palestines," he said.

When asked to name the countries, which have insisted on Islamabad to recognise Israel, Khan refrained from pin pointing and opted to be silent on the question. "There are things we cannot say. We have good relations with them," he said.

Khan reiterated that founding father of Pakistan Quaid-e-Azad Muhammad Ali Jinnah had refused to recognise Israel, adding, "Islamabad would continue to follow Jinnah's footsteps vis-a-vis Palestine."

Khan said Israel has a strong influence in the US, which he said is "another country pressurising him to recognise Israel". "The pressure is because of Israel's deep impact (influence) in the US. This influence was in fact extraordinary during the (US President Donald) Trump stint," he said.

The recent recognition of Israel by the UAE and Bahrain has resulted in diplomatic economic relations with Tel Aviv, while many other Arab countries are also considering normalisation of relations with Israel.

Pakistan being an externally economic dependent country, recognition of Israel and establishment of economic ties can be a major support for Islamabad. However, Khan has said that Islamabad would regain its economic strength on its own.

Khan said US President-elect Joe Biden's approach on the issue of Israel needs to be seen, stating that "Afghanistan is not the real issue, but Israel is". "It is to be seen how Biden deals with that. Whether he changes Trump's policies about Israel or continues with them".

"I am not sure about Biden's policy on Israel, Iran and Kashmir, but I am sure there will be no change in Washington's Afghan policy. The Democrats too want to pull out of Afghanistan," he added.

More:
Pakistan PM Imran Khan Says Under Pressure to Recognise Israel, Insists on No Ties with 'Zionists' - News18

Macron wants to identify himself with the American Zionism: Lebanese cleric – Tehran Times

Posted By on November 17, 2020

TEHRAN Shaikh Ghazi Honainah, a member of the leadership of the Islamic Action Front in Lebanon, believes that the motive that drove the French president to back the sacrilegious cartoons against the Prophet of Islam by the Charlie Hebdo magazine is that he wants to identify himself with the American Zionism.

Shaikh Honainah tells the Tehran Times that Emanuel Macron endorsed insulting Islam and its Prophet Muhammad to identify himself with the American Zionism, which bears arrogant hostility to Mohammad as the Messenger of God and his message.The message of Prophet Mohammad has become today worldwide despite all efforts to distort the true image of the Messenger and Islam, the Lebanese cleric emphasizes.The following is the text of the interview:

Q: Last month, French President Emanuel Macron publicly attacked Islam in defense of the publication of the derogatory cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) under the pretext of freedom of speech. What do you think of his remarks?

A: Regarding the recent remarks of the French president, in which he endorsed the aggressive approach of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo towards Islam and the Messenger of Islam, I should say that this is a president of a country that claims civilization, advancement, enlightenment, human rights, and addresses freedom, equality, and justice.

This president takes this stance as if he is an ordinary person in the street. I think the motive that drove him to make such a remark is that he wants to identify himself with the American Zionism, which bears arrogant hostility to Mohammad as the Messenger of God and his message.

The message of Prophet Mohammad has become today worldwide despite all attempts to distort the true image of the Messenger and Islam.

Macron wants to show his loyalty to global Zionism and the new Freemasonry to gain their green light for his second presidential bid.

Otherwise, why should someone on the level of the president of the French Republic, who represents France in the world, take such a position?

France is an important member of the (UN) Security Council and has a key role in resolving disputes in the region, especially in Lebanon.

Therefore, he wants to make propaganda against Islam and its Prophet in order to use it as a trump card in the upcoming French election.

Q: What are the definitions and limits of freedom in Islam?

A: Islamic education came to found basic principles of human societies' lives; tolerant religion focuses on permanent principles, namely freedom, justice, and equality that never change, whether for Muslims or non-Muslims. Perhaps these principles are consistent with the slogans of the French Revolution. For example, about "freedom," God said, "There shall be no compulsion in religion" (Al-Baqarah -256), and in Surah Yunus Ayah 99, it is said that "Had your Lord willed, everyone on earth would have believed. Will you compel people to become believers?" God also said, "The truth is from your Lord. Whoever willslet him believe. And whoever willslet him disbelieve." (Al-Kahf -30).

That is why Almighty God said in his holy book, "You have no control over them." (Al-Ghashiyah 22)

Hence we understand that Islamic educations endorse the concept of freedom: freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of belief, freedom of worship, and freedom of thought. Therefore, the Islamic source mentioned the second caliphate asked person, "Why did you enslave people when their mothers gave birth to them free?"

The Messenger of God (peace be upon him) said, "All of you are Adam's sons, and Adam was created out of the dust of the ground. Therefore, from the standpoint of equality in Islamic educations, all people have equal rights, and duties at all levels, the rich and the poor, men and women, young and old, Arab and non-Arab, all people in the eyes of Islam are equal.

This freedom, which Islam affirmed, does not give the right to attack others and violate others' rights. Therefore, according to Islamic law, our freedom ends when the rights of others begin. In Islam, we do not have the right to assault the beliefs of others.God asks us, "Do not insult those they call upon besides God, lest they insult God out of hostility and ignorance" (Al-An'am -108).

That is why the Messenger of God forbade us from humiliating others' dignity or insulting them, even in times of war. Prophet asked us not to scorn people who believe in a different way and those who are out of Islam. Therefore, freedom in this peaceful religion has limits, and we have not right to assault the sanctities and beliefs of others.

Q: What is the right way to respond to the Wests provocative moves against Islam?

A: First of all, I emphasize that calling Islam and spreading its message among people needs a peaceful atmosphere as societies should be open to each other and cherish dialogue and communication.

The first step is to open doors and bridge divides so that people will be aware of their bonds, gather them, and communicate and debate for what is beneficial for humanity and human society.

Therefore, these provocative moves and actions in France undoubtedly lead to undermining relations between people, cutting off communication, and further strife, and this does not serve the interests of peace and Muslims.

In our relations with people, we need to address them calmly, within a reasonable argument, and with sound logic.

Our position should be strong, and with a bright thought, we can defend Islam. Therefore, the repercussions of the attack on others' sanctities and beliefs will trigger the hatred and reaction of others against all Muslims as a whole.

This is harmful to Islam and Muslims as the number of Muslims is increasing drastically in the West. This is what worries Muslims' enemies in those societies and frightens those who see that the spread of Islam as a threat to their future.

Violent reactions do not serve the relationships between people and also the peaceful coexistence between Muslims and others.

Q: How do you assess the reaction of Islamic countries and their leaders to Macron's statements?

A: What we noticed in the recent period after re-infusion of the poisons of insulting the Messenger of God and supported by the French president, showed that the Islamic states and regimes, except a few of them, went into a deep coma or took sleeping pills as if what happened does not concern them, especially those who consider themselves the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

We have not heard a position or condemnation from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, neither at the official level nor from its nation. Unfortunately, this is what hurts us and grieves us and makes us feel that the Arab regimes do not care about Islamic causes and issues: peace, mercy, and blessings of God.

Q: Do you confirm violence in response to insult to the Prophet of Islam?

A: As Muslims, we have our way of defending Islamic sanctity; we have to deal with this issue differently. As long as the issue was in this context, we avoid insulting others' sanctuaries, greatness, and prophets, whether he is Jesus, peace be upon him, or his mother Virgin Mary, peace be upon her, or Prophet Moses, peace be upon him.

If others offend Muslims, we are forbidden from insulting any prophet on earth. God says, "The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, as did the believers. They all have believed in God and His angels and His scriptures and His messengers. The believers make no distinction between any of His messengers" (Al-Baqarah- 285).

Therefore our reaction is to argue with them in the best manner as God said, "Do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in the best manner possible, except those who do wrong among them. And say, 'We believe in what was revealed to us, and in what was revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him we are submissive.'"

We have in Quran that God made a covenant with the Children of Israel to worship none but God and be good to parents, and relatives, and orphans, and the needy; and speak nicely to people.

But beheading of a teacher in France in response to insulting Islam and its Prophet is not acceptable. Any attack against Christians and churches is condemned in Islam, according to Prophet Muhammad's educations.

Read more:
Macron wants to identify himself with the American Zionism: Lebanese cleric - Tehran Times

Iran Denies That Al Qaeda Leader Was Killed in Tehran – The New York Times

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Irans Foreign Ministry on Saturday denied a report that Israeli agents had fatally shot Al Qaedas second-ranking leader on the streets of Tehran, likening it to a Hollywood scenario manufactured by American and Zionist officials.

The ministry issued the denial to Iranian reporters in the wake of a report Friday by The New York Times, which quoted intelligence officials as saying that Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, who went by the nom de guerre Abu Muhammad al-Masri, was killed by two motorcycle-riding assassins on Aug. 7.

That day was the anniversary of the 1998 attacks on American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people. Mr. al-Masri was accused of being one of the masterminds of the attacks.

The killing of Mr. al-Masri and his daughter was carried out by Israeli agents at the behest of the United States, The Times reported.

Saeed Khatibzadeh, a foreign ministry spokesman, denied any presence of Al Qaeda members in Iran. And he warned American media outlets not to fall for the trap of Hollywood scenarios fed to them by American and Zionist officials, according to the ministrys website.

Mr. al-Masris death had been rumored but never confirmed until The Timess report.

Mr. al-Masri, who was about 58, was one of Al Qaedas founding leaders and was thought to be first in line to lead the organization after its current leader, Ayman al-Zawahri. The F.B.I. had offered a $10 million reward for information leading to his capture.

Mr. al-Masris presence in Iran was surprising given that Iran and Al Qaeda are bitter enemies. American intelligence officials told The Times that Mr. al-Masri had been in Irans custody since 2003, but that he had been living freely in an upscale suburb of Tehran since at least 2015.

In its statement Saturday, Irans foreign ministry accused the United States and Israel of leaking false information to the news media so they dont have to take responsibility for the murderous actions of this terrorist group and other groups.

See more here:
Iran Denies That Al Qaeda Leader Was Killed in Tehran - The New York Times

The Assassination of al-Qaeda’s Second-in-Command Was a Message to a Iran – Mosaic

Posted By on November 17, 2020

Over the weekend, the news broke that on August 7, Mohammad al-Masrithe al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiris number twowas gunned-down on the streets of Tehran alongside Osama bin Ladens daughter-in-law. According to multiple unnamed U.S. officials, he was assassinated by Israeli agents operating at Washingtons behest. Masri had organized the 1998 attack on the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which left a total of 224 people dead; in 2002 he orchestrated a botched attack on Israeli targets in Mombasa, Kenya, that left thirteen dead. Yoav Limor seeks to explain both the reasons for the strike on Masri, and for the decision to leak the details:

Israels declared policy is that assassinations are only a means for preventing future attacks, not exacting vengeance. Although Israeli officials have claimed Masri was busy planning attacks on Israeli and Jewish targets across the globe, it isnt very likely considering the fact that al-Qaedawhich for years now has struggled to carry out high-profile attacksis focusing its efforts on fighting the Americans and moderate Sunni regimes in the region, not Israel.

Its more reasonable to assume that Israel lent a hand to its most important ally, despite concerns that doing so would make it a target of al-Qaeda. There is clear operational value in this, but also considerable deterrence value. Toward al-Qaeda, obviously, but mainly toward Iran, which understands it is again penetrated and is in the crosshairs of the Israelis and Americans. This message should not be underestimated: Iran is mulling its nuclear options.

Masris presence in Tehran also gives the lie to the Obama administrations claim that Shiite Iran could be a useful ally in the fight against Sunni extremist groups like al-Qaeda. Of course, such a demonstration is hardly necessary, seeing as Osama bin Laden noted in correspondence with his lieutenants that his organizations core facilitation pipeline ran through the Islamic Republic. Limor remarks:

Iran, which is fighting al-Qaida in Iraq and Syria, is hosting one of the organizations most senior figures because he serves its interest by fighting the Americans in Afghanistan. It will continue doing this as long as it serves its objectives.

Read more at Israel Hayom

More about: Al Qaeda, Iran, Israeli Security, U.S. Security, US-Israel relations

The rest is here:
The Assassination of al-Qaeda's Second-in-Command Was a Message to a Iran - Mosaic


Page 910«..1020..909910911912..920930..»

matomo tracker