There are many noteworthy elements to this little slideshow:
- The little girl in the title graphic represents a typical resident of Mumbai
- The events that transpired recently in that Indian city were a "catastrophe," not unlike a hurricane or an earthquake
- Apparently, only 6 people died, all of them Jews (the other 166 either didn't die or didn't count as people).
Also interesting is the lack of non-white faces. The only melanin-enriched person I was able to find was the guy with the gun under the words "If 10 people can do so much evil..."
Fascinating, and totally unsurprising given the source.
The purpose of the video on the group's website seems to be to prompt people to provide their contact information for further direct marketing efforts.
If you have left-leaning sympathies, Raza labels you an 'Islamist.' Sound famliar? More of the 'either you're with us, or you're evil' argument which has been become a joke now.
Salaam writes: Sobia at Muslimah Media Watch has a long expose on Raheel Raza, a Canadian alarmist who dispenses sweeping indictments of much of the Canadian Muslim community, largely for not agreeing with her or doing what she says.
Sobia writes: Raheel Raza attacks El-Farouk Khaki, who in reference to the case of the Toronto 18, stated that in Canada Muslims are guilty until proven innocent. Raza felt this accusation played "into the victim-hood complex Islamists want Muslims in the West to fall into." Again, Raza trivializes the real problem of Islamophobia in Canada - a trivialization which becomes clear when she states"[t]here is no rampant Islamophobia in Canada." It is at points like these when the reader begins to wonder where she has been in the past few years. Khaki's comments make complete sense and are clearly justified when one realizes that of the original Toronto 18, only 11 are left after two years of being in prison. 18 to 11. That's a difference of 7. Seven young Muslim men who were in jail for 2 years without charge, without guilt. Guilty, until proven innocent. What more can I say? Additionally, Raza's insinuation that Khaki is an Islamist becomes ludicrous when one considers that Khaki is an openly gay Muslim man and founder of Salaam Canada, an organization for the "Queer Muslim Community of Toronto." An openly gay, not to mention ultra-liberal, man an Islamist? Really? Need I say more?
Such accusations are extremely scary and must be seen for what they are - bullying tactics. According to Raza's definition, all a Muslim must do to be labeled an Islamist is defend Muslims against the racism and Islamophobia of institutions. Institutions who Raza seems to think that, contrary to what the work of anti-racists has found, are free of Islamophobia and racism. Oh, and it seems being affiliated with the NDP, or at the least have left-leaning sympathies, can also qualify one for Islamism. Therefore, if Muslims in Canada do not want to be labeled as Islamists they should join forces with those like Raza. Sound famliar? More of the 'either you're with us, or you're evil' argument which has been become a joke now.
But Raza does not stop here. The gem of her article is the following:
In two districts (ridings as they are called in Canada) the Muslim candidate who lost were openly hostile to the Islamist agenda. Wajid Khan in Toronto and Rahim Jaffer in Edmonton. It is rumoured that the full force of the Islamist establishment and the mosque structure came out to defeat these two Muslims because they were seen, in the words of one cynic "too good looking to be considered authentic Muslims."
Yes readers, you read right. You may want to read this one again. They were considered "too good looking" to be real Muslims. Even I need a moment for that one. Let me tackle the rest of the paragraph first.
Wajid Khan ran in Mississauga and won twice as a Liberal - in 2004 and 2006. Where were the Islamists then? Maybe he wasn't good looking enough then. In 2007 Wajid, elected as a Liberal by his riding, betrayed his supporters and crossed the floor to join the in-power Progressive Conservatives. Check out the comments here to see how those in his riding reacted. Immoral and selfish were a few of the words used. As these news reports from his riding would inform us, it was this switch in parties that cost him his seat. So much so in fact that even some Conservative supporters did not vote for him because they did not trust him. No Islamist conspiracy here.
Rahim Jaffer served as MP for his Edmonton riding four times! I'll say it again - four times! He was elected in 1997 at the age of 25, and continued to serve until he was defeated this year. That's 11 years of service. Eleven years as MP. Four elections won by him. Again, where were the Islamists then? They had four chances over the span of 11 years. Have both these men become better looking with age? Is that what it is? It appears that even in Alberta, a Conservative stronghold, there were some who were discouraged by the party and felt neglected. It seems that his loss was more of a result of strategic voting by non-Muslim Canadians. This past election Canadians were so desperate to get the Conservatives out of power that many of them engaged in strategic voting - vote for whoever will win who is not a Conservative. No Islamist conspiracy here, either.
And of course, what to make of her "good looking" argument. It's absurdity stands on its own. All I can say to that is that I know a lot of Muslims now whose authenticity I will be questioning. We're a fine looking group of people readers! But I guess that means we're not authentic enough.
Raza's disingenuous presentation of the 'facts' depicts an argument so desperate to spread fear about Muslims that she left out large details of the fate of the aforementioned ousted MP's. Details that make all the difference. Details that seriously hurt her fear-mongering.
Finally, at the end Raza has some advice for Muslims.
"The lesson for all Muslims is written on the wall: If they are unwilling to stand up to the Islamists in their communities and stop the influence of Saudi Arabia and Iran, we will all suffer because of the actions of a few. "
In other words, "agree with me or else."
Raza's argument does nothing but paint the Muslim community in black and white terms, with no room for grey. It creates an image of Muslims as evil demons wandering everywhere around you with the only beacon of hope among them Raza and her friends. Because according to her, if you are a Muslim with even a hint of support for Sharia, to whatever degree or in whatever way, you are an Islamist and want to destroy Canada. You cannot be reasoned with, you cannot be trusted, and you cannot be considered a true Canadian. You make up stories about racism and Islamophobia to further your own agenda, because regardless of what the evidence states, racism and Islamophobia are a myth.
Sure, we need to stand up to the extremists in our midst. This is a problem the Muslim community seriously needs to address. However, it is not as rampant as Raza would have us believe. Therefore, we also need to stand up to such ludicrous hate and fear mongering. Muslims hold a variety of beliefs from very conservative to very liberal, but no one set of beliefs implies that one would support the implementation of Sharia as Canada's law. Therefore, at the risk of being called an Islamist, I say that we need to keep fighting racism and hate where we see it. And this includes from fellow Muslims.
Salaam writes: Sheldon Adelson is suspected of being a major funder of the anti-Muslim hatemongering 'Obsession'/'Third Jihad' campaign during the presidential campaign.
The casino company Las Vegas Sands, which is owned by right-wing billionaire Sheldon Adelson, has said it may default on debt and face bankruptcy, reports Bloomberg. In trading today, stocks in the company plunged.
The news wire adds:
Today's admission comes after Adelson, who holds a stake of more than 64 percent, invested an additional $475 million in September to avoid violating the terms of a loan, and hired an unidentified investment bank to raise more capital with his help.
But as recently as July, Adelson, who is said to still have considerable resources, had assured reporters on a conference call the company will not have liquidity problems."
Adelson, a Bush pioneer, last year worked with ex-Bush-administration officials to found the group Freedom's Watch, which advocates an open-ended commitment to the war in Iraq. As The New Yorker recently reported, he's fiercely opposed to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and is a close ally of hawkish Israeli politician and ex-PM Benjamin Netanyahu. He has been a major contributor to AIPAC, and over the years has funded numerous congressional trips to Israel.
Salaam writes: I post about the issue of violent extremism among settler supporting groups because they and their US supporters were responsible for the campaign to demonize all US Muslims during the 2008 presidential election. The 'Obsession'/'Third Jihad' campaign showed that this group lacks ethical restraint or concern for how others regard them. The head of Israeli intelligence has also recently expressed concerns.
Richard Silverstein at Tikun Olam writes:
Agudath Israel blog links Obama to Haman
To those of you not attuned to the nuances of Jewish history, my headline may not mean terribly much. But when an Orthodox Jew links anyone to Haman it's the same as linking him to Hitler. After all, there are only a few nations or families that Jews are historically called upon to eradicate, and besides Amalek, Haman's is one of them. What's even more shocking is that David Kelsey reports that Cross-Currents, the blog which made this claim is the unofficial blog of Agudath Israel, one of the official representatives of U.S. Orthodox Judaism.
Here's a taste of the spew that Chava Willig Levy writes on behalf of her fellow Orthodox Jews:
Even Obama acknowledges his "spooky good fortune."
It certainly looks as if God is guiding Mr. Obama straight to the White House. But if God is guiding his history, and ours, aren't we mere spectators forced to watch passively - some might say helplessly - as it unfolds? Several of my coreligionists think so, fatalistically pointing to the fact that the secular date of Obama's breakthrough keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention - July 27 - coincided with Tisha B'Av, a fast day commemorating the many seismic tragedies that have befallen the Jewish people.
I can understand their prediction of impending doom.
So to Levy's way of thinking, the day of Obama's triumph is inextricably linked to the day of Judaism's greatest cataclysm: the destruction of the Holy Temple. Which would make Obama a great enemy of the Jewish people on a par with the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed the First Temple.
Levy continues with her exegesis:
He is admired by untold numbers of American Jews, as well as millions of people who call for the destruction of not only Israel but of world Jewry as well
And here's the money quote:
Esther, heroine of the holiday of Purim, guides us to our answer.
...Things are looking pretty dismal for her fellow Jews. It looks as if the smooth-talking Haman, whose ambitions have been fulfilled at every turn, who has been blessed with "spooky good fortune," is destined to succeed. It looks as if God is guiding his history so that he will have his way. But Mordechai knows that, at this juncture, fatalism would be fatal. He beseeches Esther to intervene, to help halt history in its tracks.
...We have no Esther today. But over 2,400 years after she left the world's stage, her example remains. We must emulate her two-pronged strategy: politics and prayer.
To "politics and prayer" she should have added "incitement and hatred."
If you think Barack Obama is Haman, then you have license not just to hate him but to actively pursue his destruction by any means within your power. Such is the animus that Haman arouses in the Jewish people. The latter is not just an enemy, he is a would-be genocidaire, someone eager to exterminate all the Jews in his kingdom.
There is, alas a long history of such incitement both against U.S. and Israeli political figures among the Orthodox community. The dean of the Yeshiva University rabbinical school called for hanging Ehud Olmert if he divided Jerusalem. Yigal Amir, assassin of Yitzhak Rabin, is an Orthodox rightist. Is there no introspection within the Orthodox movement about the impact that such hate has in real terms? Words aren't just words after all. Words can easily lead to murder.
Ken Silverstein at Harper's writes: One of the lowest moments of this entire campaign has been the McCain campaign's repulsive smear job of Rashid Khalidi. The best remark about the whole episode came from Khalidi himself, who when asked for comment by the Washington Post, replied, "I will stick to my policy of letting this idiot wind blow over."
As I'm sure most readers know by now, Khalidi is the Palestinian American scholar and director of Columbia University's Middle East Institute who Senator McCain recently compared to a "neo-Nazi." McCain's camp has also claimed that Khalidi was a spokesman for former PLO leader Yasir Arafat, though there is no evidence this is true. As my colleague Scott Horton noted:
The McCain-Khalidi connections are more substantial than the phony Obama-Khalidi connections...The Republican party's congressionally funded international-networking organization, the International Republican Institute-long and ably chaired by John McCain and headed by McCain's close friend, the capable Lorne Craner-has taken an interest in West Bank matters. IRI funded an ambitious project, called the Palestine Center, that Khalidi helped to support. Khalidi served on the Center's board of directors. The goal of that project, shared by Khalidi and McCain, was the promotion of civic consciousness and engagement and the development of democratic values in the West Bank.
Consider here, too, the recollections of R. Bruce McColm, who was the president of the International Republican Institute (IRI) - appointed to his post with strong support from John McCain - when it first granted money to Khalidi's group. In an email today, McColm told me:
All our [grant] proposals had to be approved at board meetings with John McCain in attendance and in agreement. John did think highly of these grants. ... Ironically, it was Khalidi's academic background and his known coolness to the PLO that attracted our interest. How strange to see the McCain campaign use Khalidi as a "type of terrorist" with whom Obama hangs around.
A reader wrote to Marc Ambinder and sent the picture above:
I live in the Lehigh Valley region, near Bethlehem, PA. This morning I woke up to find these "League of American Patriots" all over the neighborhood.. Whoever sent these things must have done it in the early morning hours because we had a light rain last night.
In case it's hard to see, some of the text reads: "Black ruled nations are among the most violent, unstable nations in the world." and "Do you really want an anti-White President?"
"If you want to get people to fight, you have to make them think there's a threat and they're in danger." Itamar Marcus, Obsession
Salaam writes: This is a 12-page unraveling of the claims in the movie by Jews on First, and is far too long to reprint in full here. Strangely enough, Aish Hatorah, the organization that produced and distributed the movie and is now marketing it, is unmentioned in the report. I've chosen to excerpt here the portion of the report that deals with the direct propaganda attack on Muslims in the US. Follow the link after excerpt for the complete report.
Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak, Eli Clifton, Jane Hunter and Robin Podolsky write: The part of that section of Obsession called "Jihad in the West," depicting what it calls a threat of "infiltration" in the United States, might be the film's most blatant appeal to the American viewer's fear. Continuing the motif of simultaneous accusation and reassurance, we are warned by the pundits of Obsession that enemies walk among us. Says Nonie Darwish, "Of course, not all Muslims are like that, but America has to wake up. We have been infiltrated ... and we are strangling ourselves with our political correctness." More than once, the twin demons of the "the media" and "political correctness" are invoked to warn against any namby-pamby liberal tendencies toward excessive respect for the sensibilities of shady minority populations.
This shibboleth of "political correctness" has come to stand for a tangle of constructs according to which any critical thinking or provision of unflattering information about our government's conduct, or even any search for a complex analysis, is at once egg-headed, "elitist," actively disloyal and contemptuous of "ordinary" American folk. This dismissal of the demands on civic life incumbent on citizens of a constitutional republic founded by immigrants is, of course, as contemptuous in its assumptions about the capacity for thought of "ordinary" Americans as it is possible to be.
The internal enemy is portrayed through a spectrum of images, ranging from footage of flag desecrations by men from the Islamic Thinkers Society (a New York-based fringe group that wishes to establish an international Muslim caliphate and whose website depicts John McCain and Barack Obama as sinners), to European-born violent extremists, and the late Palestinian national leader Yassir Arafat (who was in the United States to conduct peace negotiations with the late Yitzhak Rabin, subsequently murdered by a violent fundamentalist of the Jewish, not Muslim, variety). Pundits such as Darwish and Steven Emerson of The Investigation Project indicate that the "deception" is so far advanced that "we are losing the battle."
Far more frightening than images of overt European radicals, such as Abu Hamza al-Masri, are the repeated hints by militarist pundits, such as Caroline Glick of the Center for Security Policy, who warns of a growing underground of "minorities," and "immigrants" who may dress and act "like Americans" but are plotting our destruction. How the rest of us are to distinguish such people from the "good" Muslims is not made clear - although an article by Zeyno Baran posted to the Clarion Fund's site, RadicalIslam.org, indicates that all major Muslim civil rights organizations in the United States have been infiltrated and that the good Muslims don't need to "organize politically" anyway. This is an extravagant claim. Members of anti-bias organizations such the Anti-Defamation League might be surprised to hear that their work, for respectable Jews, was never necessary.
Any demurral this picture of the "Fifth Column" might stir is condemned preemptively as "denial." The film ends with the implication that it is up to the "good" Muslims to prove themselves. As a positive example, we are shown a clip of Muslims marching and chanting, "Death to terrorists."
Movie 'undermines the very foundations of a multi-religious democracy.'
Salaam writes: The NCC is a superpower among religious organizations. This is a stunning public repudiation of the extremist individuals and organizations behind the 'Obsession' campaign by a substantial portion of the US Christian religious community. Here's the NCC's Wikipedia writeup:
The National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA (usually identified as National Council of Churches, or NCC) is an association of 35 Christian faith groups in the United States with 100,000 local congregations and 45,000,000 adherents. Its member communions (also variously called denominations, churches, conventions, or archdioceses) currently (2008) include a wide variety of Mainline Protestant, Orthodox, African-American, Evangelical and historic Peace churches.
The NCC has long been a leading force in the Christian ecumenical movement in the United States. It is related fraternally to hundreds of local and state councils of churches, interfaith organizations, and to the World Council of Churches. Even though these councils may include many of the same member churches, they have no fiscal or administrative connections to each other.
Here's the preamble and statement:
NCC Issues Statement on "Obsession" DVD NEW YORK CITY, NY (10/29/2008) -- In light of the massive effort to distribute a documentary that largely equates Islam with terrorism, the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA (NCC) Interfaith Relations Commission has issued a statement condemning all forms of ethnic, racial, and religious hatred, including "the Islamophobia typified in this film." "Obsession: Racial Islam's War Against the West" was originally released in 2006, but 28 million free DVDs have been sent to homes in newspapers or via direct mail this September.
Despite a disclaimer at the film's beginning that "most Muslims are peaceful and do not support terror," a number of critics and organizations have said that the combination violent images and discussion of Islam conflate the entire religion with terrorism. "Although the film took pains to say that most Muslims are not violent," wrote Ted Vaden of the Rahleigh, NC, News and Observer, "that disclaimer was buried in the avalanche of anti-Islamic images, slogans and interviews with experts of dubious credentials."
Official statement:
NCC Interfaith Relations Commission Statement on the DVD "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West"
In recent weeks many Americans have found in their mailboxes and morning papers a DVD called "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West." As the Interfaith Relations Commission of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, we are alarmed by the massive distribution of some 28 million copies of this DVD through paid advertisement by the Clarion Fund in more than seventy newspapers. While this film purports to educate and offers, at the outset, a disclaimer that it is not about the majority of peaceful Muslims, we see its content as serving only the aims of distorting truth and misleading viewers, fanning the sparks of mistrust, bigotry, and hatred that undermine the very foundations of a multi-religious democracy.
The National Council of Churches, bringing together thirty-five national Protestant and Orthodox churches, is concerned not only with relations among Christian churches, but also with our relations with neighbors of other faiths. Toward that end, we participate in a national dialogue between Christians and Muslims. We believe that deep relationship as neighbors calls us to common moral engagement and leadership in a world plagued by violence, poverty, atrocities, and environmental degradation.
We are deeply troubled by the apparent intent of a film that presents a barrage of violent images, pieced together with the voices of commentators who move from speaking of "radical Islam" to impugning Islam and Muslims more generally and presenting fear-mongering parallels between today's extremist terrorists and the Nazis. The National Council of Churches and its member churches consistently and adamantly denounce anti-Semitism in all its forms and condemn all forms of ethnic, racial, and religious hatred, including the Islamophobia typified in this film.
The stated aim of this film is to alert and educate the public about the dangers of terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam. We recognize that in all our traditions, extremists and radicals have forged the weaponry of violence. The National Council of Churches condemns extremism, terrorism, and religiously motivated violence, as do our Muslim dialogue partners here in the United States and globally. We stand firmly against terrorism in all its manifestations. However, the content of this film has no useful analysis of terrorism beyond a shallow, monolithic, clash-of-civilizations theme that suggests that the only two responses to "radical Islam" are war or appeasement. Such a false choice serves only to incite the fear of Islam and aggression against Muslims.
As an alternative to the message of this DVD, we lift up the current and unprecedented worldwide exchange between Christians and Muslims. The Muslim initiative, "A Common Word Between Us and You," has gained wide response from the churches, including the National Council of Churches, and has generated an ongoing process of dialogue. Building constructively on the foundations that unite us in fractured world provides a far more hopeful way ahead for Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike.
In the National Council of Churches, we stand with our Muslim colleagues and fellow citizens who have experienced the de-humanizing effects of stereotyping and bigotry. As Christians, we are mandated to uphold the values of the Gospel. As Americans, we stand with all who are determined to create just and fair democracy.
'If there is any negativity or negative feelings in the community (about Islam), we feel that's because moderate Muslims aren't vocal enough.'
In an article in Saint Louis Today: Gregory Ross, a spokesman for the Clarion Fund, said his organization goes to great lengths to focus only on what he called "radical Islam."
"If there is any negativity or negative feelings in the community (about Islam), we feel that's because moderate Muslims aren't vocal enough," Ross said. "We would sincerely invite all moderate Muslims to join with us in the fight against radical Islam. We're helping Muslims reclaim their religion and show America how peaceful the majority of Muslims are."
The Clarion Fund is affiliated with Aish HaTorah, an orthodox Jewish education network based in Jerusalem. It is listed as a "foreign not-for-profit" organization by the New York secretary of state's office.
The Clarion Fund recently released a follow-up to "Obsession" called "The Third Jihad," which - based on its trailer - claims that terrorists have infiltrated the United States with the intent of "eliminating western civilization from within."
The Rev. O'Neal Dozier, pastor of the Worldwide Christian Center in Pompano Beach, Fla., said he mailed 325,000 copies of "Obsession" three weeks ago along with another video "on same-sex marriage and child sacrifice" in the first issue of "The Judeo-Christian View."
Dozier said he was the "general publisher" but did not pay for the mailing. He refused to name the funder but said that person had been in touch with officials from Aish HaTorah.
"I do not believe all Muslims are terrorists," Dozier said. "But I do believe that the religion of Islam, according to the teachings of the Q'uran and Hadith, is a very dangerous and evil cult."
Whatever was left of Aish Hatorah's reputation in the Jewish community seems to have disappeared completely, except among like-minded extremists. Richard Silverstein writes:
I want every Jew within the sound of my voice to know that Aish HaTorah can no longer, if it ever could, be considered a group devoted to studying Torah and bringing Jews back to their religion. Forever more, we must see Aish as a militant group which uses Clarion Fund as a political front since for various reasons, it feels it cannot wear its partisan politics on its sleeve.
Let no Jew be fooled by Aish or Clarion or these films. Just as Clarion is fake, so are its films fraudulent misrepresentations of Islam. All this makes Aish a group of fraudsters and dissemblers. And hey, lest anyone reading this dismiss it as the words of a partisan, I suggest you read Jeffrey Goldberg's "take down" of Aish and Obsession in the current Atlantic:
Aish HaTorah...is just about the most fundamentalist movement in Judaism today. Its operatives flourish in the radical belt of Jewish settlements just south of Nablus, in the northern West Bank, and their outposts across the world propagandize on behalf of a particularly sterile, sexist and revanchist brand of Judaism. Which is amusing, of course, because "Obsession" is meant to expose a particularly sterile, sexist and racist brand of Islam. Story here.
Salaam writes: With apologies for my adverbial creation 'Orwellianly.' Earlier this year, the 'Museum of Tolerance' jumped on the Muslim-bashing bandwagon and hosted a showing of the 'Obsession' DVD.
A Frank Gehry-designed museum can rise in Jerusalem on a site that was once a Muslim cemetery, Israel's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday, clearing the way for Los Angeles' Simon Wiesenthal Center to build a Holy Land counterpart to its Museum of Tolerance.
The $250 million Jerusalem project had been delayed since early 2006, when builders unearthed bones. Arab leaders in Israel sued to stop the project and were supported in an unusual alliance by some ultra-Orthodox Jews with firm beliefs against disturbing graves.
The Supreme Court's ruling requires museum builders to consult with Israel's Antiquities Authority on how to rebury any remains unearthed during construction and on creating a barrier between graves and the building's foundation.
The spot seems designed either to frighten voters away from Obama or confuse them into thinking the Illinois Democrat is more comfortable supporting Iranian interests than domestic concerns.
Big lie alert: Ahmadinejad never said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map. See Juan Cole and many others.
John McCain's campaign is making what appears to be a final, full-throated effort to paint Barack Obama as a sympathizer with the Muslim world. In the process they are putting out into the public domain as many images as possible of Obama's face cast over a map of the Middle East.
The latest salvo came Wednesday afternoon, when the Republican nominee released a web ad placing Obama's visage in front of an outline of Iran, and presenting aspects of the Senator's foreign policy alongside music traditionally associated with a Muslim call to prayer.
"Obama doesn't have preconditions but Iran does. Iran, whose president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Israel must be wiped off the map. Iran demands that the U.S. must cease its support of Israel and that all U.S. military forces must leave the Middle East, meaning we abandon Iraq, Turkey and Kuwait. What will Obama do? Will he admit he was wrong or will he accept Iran's demands?'
The spot seems designed either to frighten voters away from Obama or confuse them into thinking the Illinois Democrat is more comfortable supporting Iranian interests than domestic concerns. The campaign put it out on the web, where provocative items are placed mainly to grab the media attention.
Indeed, the Republican ticket has been subtly pushing this line for days now. As the Huffington Post reported on Tuesday, the Republican Party of Florida is sending out a new mailer that places the Illinois Democrat's face right over a map of Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. It accuses him of being "dangerously unprepared" and "no friend of Israel."
Hours earlier, the McCain campaign had taken the step of reissuing an old campaign ad (for what purpose, it isn't clear) that declared Obama had once called the threat from Iran: "tiny."
According to Taheri, a neoconservative with a history of war provacateuring, a Shiite text proclaims that just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a 'tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West. Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us.'
Salaam writes: Has any one ever heard of the Bahir al-Anwar? If so, please leave a message. Be interesting to know if Taheri made this up out of whole cloth or if he twisted something that exists to suit his fearmongering agenda.
Richard Bartholomew reports: Forbes has thought better of a recent foray into Islamic eschatology, and it has pulled {someone swiped the story and posted it at Free Republic} an article by Amir Taheri that began with the sentence:
Is Barack Obama the "promised warrior" coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?
However, while this opening has obviously been calculated to provoke another "Obama is a Muslim fanatic" scare, Taheri in fact purports to be reporting on a view from Iran:
The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam.
According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us."
This is followed by a critique of Obama's Iran policy.
Alas, Taheri does not give us any reference for the quote, either to the Iranian website or to the relevant passage from the original text, which is better-known as the Bahir al-Anwar. I've looked all over the net for a clue, but there is nothing (at least in English) on-line, including available via Google Books. Apparently only one volume of the text has been translated into English (vol. 51), and although it deals in eschatological issues around the Mahdi there is no passage that fits the above. The volume can be seen here.
It may be of relevance to note that Taheri was responsible for a 2006 story about a plan by Iran to force Jews to wear yellow insignia; the story turned out to be untrue. Other doubts about his veracity have also been aired. He has one fan, though, in Joel Richardson, who tells us he is a "trustworthy writer". You know, like Walid Shoebat.
Lewis predicted that on August 22, 2006, Iran would attack Israel 'to commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq' thereby prompting 'the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world.'
Salaam writes: Jim Lobe is to be commended for his initial reporting in 2007 that established the link between the cult group Aish Hatorah and the 'Obsession' DVD. In the excerpt below, he provides some new detail about the individuals who make up the 'lunatic fringe' brain trust that produced the two movies.
The Washington Post also reports that Aish Hatorah had planned a major distribution of 'Third Jihad' last month, but that the movie 'was held up in post-production delays.' More likely, the movie funders and producers realized that the campaign was backfiring and generating animosity to themselves and their ally John McCain. It's also unlikely that very many newspapers would have chosen to participate in another DVD mailing after the outcry that arose from the first. Public reports of the failure of their efforts to distribute the second movie would have underlined that the Islamophobic narrative they were trying to push had been completely rejected in the American 'marketplace of ideas.' Hence the likely reason for the lie about 'post-production delays.'
Jim Lobe writes: The producer/distributor of "Obsession" was the still-mysterious Clarion Fund, which has just released a sequel, "The Third Jihad" about which my colleague Eli Clifton posted earlier this month. The new video, originally intended for distribution before next week's election, according to the Post's article, suffered production delays (hence, the distribution of "Obsession" instead).
While I haven't yet seen it, I understand that it features commentary by Clifford May of the Likudnik Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and, more prominently, Princeton historian and neo-con icon Bernard Lewis, who, according to various accounts, helped persuade Dick Cheney, among others, that the Iraq invasion would be a very good thing for all concerned. It was also Lewis who on August 8, 2006, predicted on the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would very possibly launch an attack on Israel exactly two weeks later, on August 22, to mark "the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to 'the farthest mosque,' usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back. This [date]," he went on, "might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world." Goldberg's words about "hysterics" and "the lunatic fringe" come to mind.
Nonetheless, it was just six months later that, with Cheney in attendance, Lewis delivered the American Enterprise Institute's (AEI) annual Irving Kristol Lecture - in which he warned that militant Islam was launching its third attempt to conquer Europe and the West through "terror and migration." And it was presumably after that that he sat down for a long interview with the Islamophobic makers of "Obsession" and "The Third Jihad."
Aish HaTorah denies any direct connection to the film, which is designed to make naive Americans believe that B-52s filled with radical jihadists are about to carpet-bomb their churches, and are only awaiting Barack Obama's ascension to launch the attack.
Salaam writes: I say 'postmortem' in the headline because the presidential campaign is almost over and it doesn't look like the Aish Hatorah movement is going to try an extensive distribution with 'Third Jihad' the way they did with 'Obsession.' Having said that, we know the 'Obsession'/'Third Jihad' campaign will continue at a slow burn as it is shown to small groups in small venues throughout the country in what will likely be a longterm effort to instigate a generalized Islamophobia throughout the US.
I've covered Aish Hatorah and the 'Obsession'/'Third Jihad' campaign extensively on this blog. Just use the search function here to access information and rich links to other sources.
Jeffrey Goldberg writes: I've only watched the 12-minute version of "Obsession," the film sent to more than 28 million people in various swing states, apparently by associates and partisans of the Jewish movement known as Aish HaTorah, or "Fire of the Torah," but it was enough to understand that it is the work of hysterics. One of my favorite hysterics, the Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick, is featured prominently, pieces of the sky falling about her head as she rants about the End of Days.
Aish HaTorah denies any direct connection to the film, which is designed to make naive Americans believe that B-52s filled with radical jihadists are about to carpet-bomb their churches, and are only awaiting Barack Obama's ascension to launch the attack. But the manifold connections, as laid out in this article, among others, make it clear that high-level officials of Aish are up to their chins in this project. The most disreputable flack in New York, Ronn Torossian, who represents Aish, makes an appearance in this story, which was to be expected: Torossian last made the news when he employed sock-puppetry in defense of one of his many indefensible clients, Agriprocessors, Inc., the Luvavitch-owned kosher slaughterhouse that treats its employees nearly as badly as it treats its animals, which is saying something, because Agriprocessor slaughterers have been filmed ripping out the tracheas of living cattle.
But I digress. It's said of Ronn Torossian that he represents "right-wing" Israeli politicians, but this description does not do his clients justice. "Right-wing" is Bibi Netanyahu. Torossian represents the lunatic fringe. Several years ago, in one of my only encounters with him, he introduced me to Benny Elon, a rabbi and settler leader who was then Israel's tourism minister, and who, at various points in his career, has more or less advocated the ethnic cleansing of Israel of its Arab citizens. At one point, when Elon had gone to take a telephone call, Torossian and I started talking about Israel's right to reprisal for terrorist attacks. I was arguing in favor of some sort of proportionality (this was after Jenin, in which the Israeli army chose to root out terrorism block by block rather than bomb the city from the air) but Torossian interrupted: "I think we should kill a hundred Arabs or a thousand Arabs for every one Jew they kill." I was somewhat taken aback, of course, because this is a Nazi idea, rather than a Jewish idea. I asked him to explicate: "If someone from a town blows himself up and kills Jews, we should wipe out the town he's from, kill them all. The Israelis are suckers. They should have destroyed Jenin." He went on like this for some time. I would only note that Torossian, to the best of my knowledge, never volunteered for the Israeli army, so he seemed to me by definition a chickenhawk.
Torossian's attitude toward Arabs and toward the peace process are echoed in the approach of Aish HaTorah, which is just about the most fundamentalist movement in Judaism today. Its operatives flourish in the radical belt of Jewish settlements just south of Nablus, in the northern West Bank, and their outposts across the world propagandize on behalf of a particularly sterile, sexist and revanchist brand of Judaism. Which is amusing, of course, because "Obsession" is meant to expose a particularly sterile, sexist and racist brand of Islam.
The tragedy of "Obsession" is not that it is wrong; the tragedy is that it takes a serious issue, and a serious threat -- that of Islamism -- and makes it into a cartoon. Its central argument is that the "Islamofascism" of today is not only the equivalent of Nazism, but worse than Nazism. This is quite a thing for a Jewish organization to argue. One of the featured speakers in "Obsession" is a self-described "former PLO terrorist" named Walid Shoebat, who argues on film that a "secular dogma like Nazism is less dangerous than Islamofascism is today."
This is lunacy, of course. Islamism isn't Nazism. It's bad enough without being labeled Nazism. Martin Gilbert, the biographer of Churchill, shows up in the film as well, and doesn't cover himself in glory: "History has an unfortunate habit of always repeating itself," he says. Always? Does this mean that the Arabs are right now constructing death camps for the Jewish citizens of Israel?
Just unbelievable, but the most unbelievable part of the "Obsession" campaign is its timing: What does this film have to do with Barack Obama? The film is meant to suggest that Obama will provide aid and comfort to Islamism, or is an Islamist himself. There is not one shred of proof on this planet that Barack Obama is anything other than an Israel-supporting Christian. Yes, he went to party with Rashid Khalidi. So did I. Does that make me a member of Hezbollah?
I actually have another idea for a film: I would call it "Obsession" as well, but it would be about the poor souls who believe that Obama is a radical Muslim, that Israel has a right to expel Arabs from its lands, and that America should declare war on all of Islam.
This blog has no relation to the 'Cheerleaders' group who have referred to this blog on their website as their own. The claim is an attempt at identity theft, one of several unethical or illegal acts they have engaged in.
