We’ll do God, and you can do Baal!

I came across the following through the help of an excellent new blog-find, WI Catholic Musings. The full article appeared at The Jewish Press, who are, as they are putting it themselves, commenting from "from a centrist or Modern Orthodox perspective".

The Pope's Got A Point
By: Rabbi Yerachmiel Seplowitz

The pope has generated a bit of controversy.

First, he permitted congregations to go back to the old custom of praying in Latin. (More about that later.) Then he announced that only the Catholic Church qualifies as a real church. Protestants, as far as the pope is concerned, simply don’t make the grade!

And with that, over 40 years of ecumenical dialogue go down the tubes. Protestant leaders are offended. The churches whose founders long ago broke away from the Catholic Church feel they are considered less-than-Christian by an institution they previously rejected as “too Christian.”

No doubt, in short order, a multitude of Jewish leaders will express their own concerns over the pontiff’s lack of tolerance for those whose beliefs are different from his own. After all, a spirit of cooperation fostered by the Second Vatican Council back in 1965 has allowed people of diverse faiths to share their beliefs in mutual respect. Why, we’ve even witnessed the intriguing phenomenon of cardinals, in full “uniform,” visiting rabbinical students to observe the study of Talmud. How, many are asking, could the pope jeopardize this détente with his bigoted condemnation of non-Catholics?

I have one thing to say to the pope: “Hear! Hear!” What do his critics want from the man? He’s got a religion to run!

I, for one, am not at all put off by the fact that the leader of another religion sees that religion as primary. If he thinks his religion is right, he obviously thinks mine is wrong.

I’ve always found it curious that people of different religions get together in a spirit of harmony to share their common faiths. By definition, these people should have strong opposition to the beliefs of their “colleagues” at the table. The mode of prayer of one group should be an affront to the other group. Yet, for some reason it isn’t. Why is that?

I suspect the reason many representatives of diverse religious groups find it easy to pray together is that they don’t really believe very strongly in the uniqueness of their own beliefs.

If my religion is okay and your religion is okay, we can mix and match and share with mutual respect and admiration. Can you envision Elijah the Prophet conducting an ecumenical service on Mount Carmel? “Oh, would you like to have a joint prayer meeting? Great! We’ll do God, and you can do Baal!” I don’t think so!

What the pope is saying – and I agree 100 percent – is that there are irreconcilable differences, and we can’t pretend those differences don’t exist.

Christians believe we are all sinners and that there is only one way to achieve salvation. It starts with believing that the Messiah arrived about 2,000 years ago. I obviously don’t believe that premise to be correct. I can’t. Such a belief is, based upon the teachings of the Torah, theologically indefensible.

If you believe in something, if you really believe in something, you need to have the courage of your convictions and stand up for what you believe. I can respect the pope for making an unambiguous statement of what he believes.

We need to respect all people. All of us are created in God’s image. This does not mean, however, that we have to respect their opinions. Nor does it mean that we should go around trashing the beliefs of other people. What it means is that we don’t need to play games of “I’m okay, your okay” with beliefs we find unacceptable.

The Latin Mass that was dropped many years ago included a prayer for the conversion of the Jews. Now that the Latin Mass is once again acceptable to Catholics, the International Jewish Committee on Interreligious Consultations has written to the Vatican and expressed “profound concern … that the authorization may have allowed the return of this prayer.” They have requested confirmation that the conversion prayer will not be reintroduced.

I ask you, does this make sense? Where do we Jews get off making demands of Catholics that they only say prayers that meet with our approval?

Next week is Tisha B’Av. Have we forgotten that we are living in exile? The audacity of Jews dictating to Christians how they should pray is simply mind-boggling.

First off, the request implies that we can influence Catholic theology. Face it: Christians believe they are right and we are wrong. They think we should convert, and that attitude will not change until Moshiach comes.

And speaking of Moshiach, if we are going to sit down with the Vatican to negotiate liturgy, should we, l’havdil, offer to take out the second paragraph of Aleinu, in which we pray for the day when gentiles will stop worshipping idols? How about “sheheim mishtachavim” – the line that Christian censors removed from Aleinu, claiming it insulted Christians? Many of us have put it back. Should we allow the Vatican to dictate what we say in our prayers? Or should we, perhaps, do a line-by-line analysis of the Talmud to make sure there is nothing there that people may find offensive?

I don’t mean to suggest that we shouldn’t be talking to Catholic leaders. The pope needs to know, for example, that it is good to encourage his millions of followers to support Israel and that it is bad to hate Jews. There needs to be careful dialogue, but it needs to be a secular, common, needs-based dialogue. We should not be studying Talmud together and we should not be discussing prayer.

A Catholic doctor once came to visit me in my office. Someone had told him what I said in a sermon about the murder of pre-born children, and he determined that he and I were on the same page. He invited me to participate in a symposium on abortion, to be made up of doctors, lawyers, and clergy. He was looking for non-Catholics. “After all,” he reasoned, “we orthodox people have to stick together!”

I declined the invitation.

The rabbi's views are like a fresh breeze cleaning up the minds clogged by relativism and I-am-okay-you-are-okay drivel. Can you believe it! He is not taken aback by the fact that the pope is Catholic! This is a long-overdue slap in the face of all those who insist on their different-, precious- and uniqueness and who are then not content with discerning respect received from a distance, an attitude best defined as leftism, by the way.

(From Roncesvalles!)

The Indonesian summit asking for a Global Caliphate and Spain

I have written a long post about the Indonesian summit, held by 100.000 Hibz ut-Tahrir supporters and the consequences it could bring for the West and specifically for Spain.

There are several things that worry me really: the secret recruitment, the selection of the recruits between educated middle-class and their support of terrorism. Yes, I know that they say they are not violent, but they support terrorism both in Palestine and in Iraq, saying it's the Jihad.

Of course, they reject Western democracy, but support a democracy with religious values, although they support the Caliphate. They also pretend as a final goal, the conversion of all the world to Islam.

The Disbanded People

60 construction workers building the Communist showpiece Stalin-Allee, the "first socialist avenue in Germany" in East Berlin went on strike on 16 June 1953, to demand a reduction in recent work-quota increases. They called for a general strike the next day. By dawn of June 17, 100,000 protesters had gathered with more arriving throughout the morning. More protests were held all over the GDR.

The initial pleas of the protesters for the reinstatement of the previous lower work quotas turned into political demands. SED functionaries took to the streets and began arguing with small groups of protesters. Eventually, the workers demanded the resignation of the East German government. The government turned to their Soviet brethren for military support.

At noon, the Volkspolizei (East Germany's "people's police") had trapped many of the demonstrators in an open square. When dozens of T-34 Soviet tanks appeared, the uprising started to lose its clout and although there were no major assaults on the military, a massacre followed. It is still unclear how many people died during the uprising and by the death sentences which followed. The official number of victims is 55. After the evaluation of documents accessible since reunification, the number of victims appears to be at least 125, whereas higher estimates put the number of dead at 267.

20,000 people were imprisoned as felons, three were decapitated later. Summarily executed were: Kurt Arndt, Eisleben; Ernst Markgraf, Stralsund; Heinz Brandt, Rostock; Walter Schädlich, Leipzig; Eberhard von Canerin, Geithain; Axel Schäfer, Erfurt; Alfred Dartsch, Magdeburg; Günter Schwarzer, Gotha; Alfred Diener, Jena; Heinz Sonntag, Leipzig; Willy Göttling, Berlin; Hermann Stahl, Eisleben; Hartmann, Delitzsch; Herbert Strauch, Magdeburg; Peter Heider, Magdeburg; Hans Wojkowski, Stralsund; Vera Knoblauch, Rostock; Walter Krüger, Eisleben and three unknown Volkspolizisten. Willy Göttling was from West Berlin. He was sentenced to death and shot because of the "brigand-like excesses against the ruling power and the people". His body was never released.

In memory of the 1953 East German rebellion, West Germany established June 17 as a national holiday. Upon reunification in October 1990, the "Day of German Unity" was moved to October 3, the date of the formal reunification, thus removing it firmly from its roots.

Just in time for the 54th memorial of July 17, 1953, yesterday and after the merger with a smaller West German sister party, Die Linke, the successor of the Communist party responsible for the bloodshed on June 17, 1953, has become the third biggest party in Germany following CDU/CSU and SPD.

Read it all at Roncesvalles.

Don't let British law overrule American law and the search for truth

Rachel Ehrenfeld may be reaching a victory in one of the most important free speech cases in the past three decades. WorldNetDaily has the latest on what Ehrenfeld's been dealing with:

In 2003, she documented and wrote, "Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It," that alleged Saudi Arabian billionaire Khalid Salim A. Bin Mahfouz helped in that pipeline of financing.

Mahfouz formerly was president of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia and Forbes estimates his personal wealth at more than $3 billion. He says he condemns terrorism and never has assisted Osama Bin Laden or others.

Several of those books were purchased via the Internet by British buyers, and a short time later Mahfouz filed a libel action against Ehrenfeld within Great Britain, where antiquated libel laws put the burden of proof on the defendant.

She didn't respond, and later was ordered by a British High Court judge to pay about $120,000 in a down payment on damages as well as destroy copies of her book, which had been published by Bonus Books.

However, she's battling back, claiming what was described as "libel tourism" is impeding her "ability to research and write freely about international terrorism" and is seeking through the U.S. courts to have that ruling nullified.

She recently moved a step toward victory when the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals asked the New York State Supreme Court for a clarification on a state law that appears to give U.S. courts jurisdiction on the issue.

Judge Wilfred Feinburg, at the Court of Appeals, concluded, "The question is important to authors, publishers and those, like Mahfouz, who are the subject of books and articles. The issue may implicate the First Amendment rights of many New Yorkers, and thus concerns important public policy of the state.

"Because the case may lead to personal jurisdiction over many defendants who successfully pursue a suit abroad against a New York citizen, the question before us is also likely to be repeated," he continued.

Circuit Judges Pierre N. Leval and Jose A. Cabranes joined Judge Feinberg in the ruling.

Read the whole article to learn more. England's ludicrous stone-age laws shouldn't be allowed to prevent other countries from being able to search for the truth in serious subjects. Not to mention that Mahfouz is a coward if he's going to exploit the laws in Britain to have his way instead of going to the US and file suit there.

Solidarity with Ralph Giordano

This is the, so far, last chapter of the Cologne mosque drama. What started as a travesty has developed into a major tragedy in the meantime.

Like many other people critical of Islam, German-Jewish anti-Fascist journalist and writer Ralph Giordano, a Holocaust-survivor now in his 84th year, has been subjected to death threats.

Why? because he, too, had denounced the building of the mosque at Cologne.

This petition takes up his words and arguments. It is online now in English and French as well.

Yours truly is among the initial signatories and reponsible for the English translation. We need the help and support of all courageous and wellmeaning people all over the world.

To: Politicians & Media

We, too say: "No, no and no again!"

Following the murder of Dutch film director Theo van Gogh and the death threats against Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq, the Dutch cabaret artist Ewoud Jansen and many others, the Islam-inspired madness has arrived in Germany some time ago already. Muslim fanatics are out to kill Hans-Peter Raddatz, Seyran Ates and Ekin Deligöz and are now targeting Ralph Giordano: The journalist and writer received death threats because he called for "the cancellation of the plans regarding the building of a major mosque in the Cologne suburb of Ehrenfeld, because they are transporting a false image of the real relationship between Muslim minority and the majority of the German society.

Like Ralph Giordano we therefore ask:

- Where are we that we have to check first whether radical Muslims will approve of what we do or leave?
- Where are we that we let religious and other fanatics decide what we are allowed to say and what not in anticipating obedience?
- Where are we that we are caving in to those Islamic ire- and outrage-collectives, obviously retrievable-on-demand by some local Mullahs between Cairo, Iran and Bali, as the Danish "Mohammed cartoon brawl" revealed?

Like Ralph Giordano, we are fed up with the "traditions, customs and habits, which are bastardising any criticism and turn it into insults, but are as quick as extravagant when it comes to name-calling of people of a different faith“. And we, too, are fighting back a "potential blackmailing capacity, which wants to keep us under Islamic supervision and which reaches with its tentacles from the Near- and Middle East right into the heart of Europe."

We therefore stress:

We will not submit freedom of expression to Sharia law!
There is no place anywhere for death threats, antisemitism and Holocaust denial!

We there fore ask politicians and the media:

1. to preserve without trade-off the 200-year-old European achievements of unrestricted personal freedom, freedom of opinion and expression. No person has the right to threaten somebody else with murder because he doesn't like the other person's views;

2. to prosecute without taboo all conditions and circumstances within the Muslim minority that are against the German constitution (Grundgesetz) and therefore inimical to integration, first and foremost the unacceptable status of women;

3. to embark upon a critical examination of those imams and stakeholders who are abusing the liberal framework and tolerance of a free constitution to push through totalitarian views of state and religion within their enclave, who are undermining the conventions of rule of law and constitution, who are teaching hesperophobic indoctrination in line with Sharia law and who reject the standards of democracy such as co-education, sex-education, gym classes, school trips and the equality of the sexes;

4. to embark upon a critical examination of the Quran and the biography of Mohammed;

5. to support all secular Muslims who intend to pave the way to integration by means of reform;

6. to tackle the official integration-, antisemitism- and right-wing-extremism policy in Germany on state- and federal level single-minded- and openly.

We, too say: "No, no and no again!"

Cross-posted at Roncesvalles and MNM.

Truth A Mighty Sword Makes

And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. - John 8:31

Brilliant! A virtual online Infidel library "promoting Islam-critical books in cyberspace". A monumental task perhaps. But well worth the effort, if we are to become victorious against the spread of Islam worldwide.

The pen is mightier than the sword, as is TRUTH! Combine the two and a powerful weapon is at our disposal.

H/T Foe Hammer’s Anvil


Creating the Online Infidel Library
Wolfgang Bruno - 5/25/2007

Fatima Houda-Pepin, raised a Muslim and active in the struggle against the use of sharia in Canada, warns that the public should make an effort to get to know those in the Muslim community who are lobbying for application of Shari‘a: “One of the strengths of Islamists is that they know you very well. They know our history, they know our culture, they know our justice system.” The reason why so many Westerners reacted with defeatism and despair over the Muhammad cartoons affair is because we are mentally on the defensive. We are reacting more than acting, waiting passively for the next Islamic move. We haven’t even named the enemy yet. The attacks of 9/11, the London and Madrid bombings were reduced to the work of “evildoers who had hijacked a great religion,” not Islam itself. Muslims have been carefully studying our weak points for decades, to find ways to exploit them. Meanwhile, we have largely been ignoring them, first because we didn’t take them seriously, and later because we would not want to get involved in a global clash with the Islamic world. Get real: This is a world war, at least a cold one. War has already been declared upon us, and it is irrelevant whether Westerners and infidels like this or not. We need to recognize this and start fighting back, before we lose this fight without ever having admitted that we were in it.

Now is the perfect time to launch an ideological counter-offensive, using the Internet. Internet censorship is still less effective in most Muslim countries than in China, and there is now a critical mass of ordinary Westerners who understand that Islam constitutes a mortal threat to their freedom. Many of them could be mobilized, if somebody leads them and shows them how. The key to winning this struggle is not to engage the silent majority in the Islamic world, but to mobilize the silent majority in the West and in the infidel world, and perhaps the minority of ex-Muslims within the Islamic world.

I have advocated the idea of creating an organized network to promote Islam-critical books in cyberspace. Maybe a dozen or more blogs and websites could form the global backbone of this network, the cyberspace version of Radio Free Europe. This to make it more difficult for hackers to block the efforts, and to disseminate the books as much as possible. The websites should preferably be based in the USA, since it has the strongest protection of freedom of speech, or at least outside of the jurisdiction of the Eurabian Union. Start with those who are already in the business, for instance Jihad Watch, Faith Freedom International, Little Green Footballs, Michelle Malkin and others. These “backbone” websites should receive financial compensation for this task. Anybody, anywhere should be able to download the books or republish them at their own websites. This would bypass media censorship and create an Online Infidel Library. It would mirror the online library Google is trying to create now, but with books about Islam only. The information would spread around the planet faster than CAIR can say “Islamophobia”. The genie would be out of the bottle, and no amount of intimidation, hacker attacks or “hate speech” lawsuits could return it to the bottle.

NOTE: The following list of books is based solely on my own subjective views. The authors have not been consulted about whether they would agree to publish their books on the Internet, and it is quite possible that some of them might object to this. However, it is likely that several of them would agree to this, provided that they get adequate financial compensation for this. The number of suggested titles could easily be doubled, but any such Online Infidel Library would probably include some of the books I have listed here. I have read most of these books myself, but include some by reputation or recommendations from people I trust:

Read Wolfgang Bruno's entire article here.

Also Foehammer has compiled his own library.

I love books. It is through careful reading and a growing library in my own home that I have come to better understand the nature of Islam and the War on Terror. Below you will find many selections hand-picked by myself, as well as definitions and a few greatly expounded-upon explanations wrapped-in-opinion, all neatly categorized. I update this section regularly. I hope it proves beneficial to you.

Final thought....

Many wearing rapiers are afraid of goosequills - Shakespeare Hamlet, Act II, Scene 2