Category Archives: Islam

Hate crimes targeting Jews and the Growing Muslim Population

1488271_425582047574708_1995253418_n

The recent arrest of a Muslim convert for the rash of anti-Semitic bomb threats throughout the United States points to an interesting gap in the FBI statistics on hate crimes.  Religiously motivated hate crimes include data on the religion of the victim, but not of the perpetrator.  This means that while we know that anti-Semitic attacks are increasing, we do not know who is perpetrating them.  Liberals have tried to claim that it was precipitated by Donald Trump’s election, but according to the FBI, the increase in anti-Semitic hate crimes began in 2014.  It would be difficult for anyone but the most delusional Democrat to blame Trump for an increase in hate crimes that began before he even declared himself a candidate (not that there is any shortage of delusional Democrats), but the question remains:  Why have the number of anti-Semitic hate crimes been increasing?  Is there another trend whose correlation matches this increase?

Yes.  There is.

Since 9/11, the number of Muslim immigrants admitted to the United States averaged approximately160,000 per year, but in 2013, the Obama administration admitted 280,276, an increase of almost 90%, and continued to do so until he left office.  At the same time Obama’s position towards Israel became increasingly hostile, culminating in his attack on Israeli settlements in the UN Security Council.  The increase in Muslim immigration and the ratcheting up of Obama’s attacks on Israel almost perfectly coincide with the increase in anti-Semitic hate crimes in the United States.

Of course, without the data on the perpetrators’ religions, this is simply speculation, but it can be resolved by having the FBI investigate the religious affiliations of those who commit religiously-inspired bias crimes.  Given that we already collect racial data on those whose crimes are motivated by race, it would seem perfectly logical to collect religious data on those who crimes are motivated by religious bias.  Since the Trump administration has recently directed the FBI to collect and report crimes committed by illegal aliens (a category that was previously left unreported) it’s clear that the president is already thinking along those lines.  Perhaps his next executive order can compel the collection of this potentially illuminating data.

The Palestinians Don’t Deserve a State

img_0525

For decades the two-state solution has been repeatedly floated as the preferred goal of peace between Israel and the Arabs (‘Palestinians’). Yet it has never been realized. Accusations have been tossed around by various voices laying blame on both sides for the failure of the two-state solution to be implemented.

In light of the recent summit between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump, it would appear the longstanding positon of the U.S. supporting the two-state solution is fizzling out. In my opinion, this is long overdue.

Simply put, the so-called ‘Palestinians’ don’t deserve a state.

The concept of a two-state solution has already been attempted with the 1947 UN partition of two states, one Arab, one Jewish. It failed. Why? The Arab nations rejected and ignored the resolution, attacking the fledgling Jewish state one day after it declared independence in 1948. Six decades and seven wars later (three with Hamas) what has changed?

A dramatic shift took place in 1967, when Yasser Arafat decided the Arabs who were displaced from the 1948 and 1967 wars deserved to have their own unique identity. So he renamed them “Palestinians.” For the record, before 1967 the term “Palestinians” referred to Jews. Walid Shoebat, an Arab who was living in Jericho during the ’67 war, said “On June 4 I went to sleep as an Arab. The next day, without moving anywhere I am suddenly called a “Palestinian.”

Arafat’s campaign included more than just an identity change for these newly renamed Palestinians. He demanded an independent state, and laid claim to the entire area west of the Jordan River which Israel captured during the 1967 war. As far as Arafat was concerned all this land was ‘Palestinian land.’ In 1964 he founded the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) with a specific goal of liberating “Palestine,” which   included every inch of land of Israel.

International law affirms any land captured during a defensive war belongs to the victor, which was Israel.

After the 1967 war other terror groups sprung up including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (1967), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (1969), Islamic Jihad (1979), Hizb’allah (1985) Hamas (1987), and several others. For the past 15 years the Fatah Party has been the dominant party in Judea/Samaria, generally referred to as the West Bank. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is the party chairman.

Each of these groups is dedicated to destroying (‘liberating’) the state of Israel.

So why don’t the ‘Palestinians’ deserve a state? First off their claim to the land has no basis in reality. It’s not as though Arabs have no history in the land. They do. However, the greater and more historical association belongs to the Jews. The Bible tells us it is this very land which was given to the Jews as “an everlasting inheritance.” This land, including Jerusalem, is the ancestral home of the Jewish people, superseding Palestinian claims by thousands of years.

However, let’s transition from the legitimate historical connection the Jews have to this land to today’s current events.

Let’s examine today’s Israeli/Palestinian relations a little closer.

Israel has made several attempts to appease the Palestinians, through agreements and offers. In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak made an unprecedented offer to Yasser Arafat. It included turning over roughly 99% of the demanded land, dividing Jerusalem, and compensation for so-called “refugees.” By any definition, this was a huge compromise on the part of Israel. The offer was rejected and the talks collapsed. President Clinton laid blame squarely where it belonged, on Arafat.

Why was such an incredibly generous offer rejected? Simple, the Muslims refuse to accept the existence of a Jewish state under any circumstances, no matter what the borders are. They are firmly convinced every square inch of the state of Israel is Muslim land. Thus, to accept the existence of a sovereign Jewish state on land which they consider theirs would be viewed as blasphemy. This is punishable by death.

Not only do they refuse to accept the existence of Israel, or peacefully coexist, they have mounted a decade-long campaign to destroy the Jewish state.

For example, look at their founding charters:

Fatah Charter (party of Mahmoud Abbas)

Article 12 – “complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence”

Article 13 – “Establishing an independent democratic state with complete sovereignty on all Palestinian lands, and Jerusalem is its capital city” — Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People’s armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.

PLO Charter

Article 9 – “armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine”

Article 19 – “The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal”

Hamas Charter

Preamble: ‘Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.

Article 6 – The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.

Article 13 – “…There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.”

With the addition of Hizb’allah in Lebanon, these three organizations are today’s main players in the conflict. Their charters represent the principles upon which each organization was founded. Based on the quotes from each of their charters it is unquestionable none of them seek a two state solution, or peaceful coexistence with a Jewish state of Israel. They all seek its destruction.

Yet, instead of calling out these organizations, world leaders and the UN continue to blame Israel’s construction of homes as the main obstacle to a peace agreement. Recently the UN made this their official position with the passage ofResolution 2334. They are ignoring the clear requirement for the annihilation of Israel. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly said he will never accept Israel as a Jewish state.

He glorifies those who murder innocent Israeli civilians by naming parks and schools after them. When young Arabs stab Israelis or run them over with vehicles, he refuses to condemn such terror. He considers every drop of Muslim blood holy in its pursuit of Palestine’s liberation.

The curriculum in Palestinian schools teaches children that the Jews stole their land. Moreover, they are taught it is holy to be a murder Jews and become a martyr for Allah.

Some might suggest the terrorists don’t represent the Arab-Palestinian population as a whole. If this is true, why has there not been any outcry from the general Palestinian population against the terror? Why has there not been a single demonstration for peace with Israel on the Palestinian street?

If they are committed to peacefully coexist with Israel there would be visible efforts to make that known to the world. Instead, all we see is continued terror and calls for Israel to cease construction. World leaders and the UN need to stop ignoring the Palestinians true agenda.

The reality is the Arab Palestinians need a civilized gut check. Until such time as they renounce all terror, recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, drop all future land claims and amend their charters, they do not deserve their own state.

A civilized world should not reward murderers committed to destroy their presumed peace partner. Such action amounts to sanctioning their destructive anti-Semitic agenda.

To read more of Dan Calic’s articles visit his Facebook page.

Iran: Women, before and after the Islamist Takeover

10271611_1399501433685717_2036143759808975555_n

Respect for women’s rights in Iran dates back to the ancient Persian Empire where it was common practice for women to serve as monarchs, army commanders, or naval officers. However, when the great empire was occupied by zealous followers of Islam in the seventh century A.D., Iranian women lost many of their privileges and were relegated to a status inferior to men. Some were even condemned to live as slaves. In recent times, the practical struggle of Iranian women to regain their status began with playing a great role in the Iranian Constitutional Revolution of 1905. Further, that struggle continued in the efforts of the citizenry during the former monarchical government in Iran.

Iran before the Islamic Revolution (1979)

Reza Shah the Great, founder of the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran, courageously initiated the greatest challenge of his era (1925 – 1941): the abolishment of the hijab (veil) for Iranian women on Jan. 6, 1935. The policy of “Kashf-e-Hijab” banned a very basic Islamic law, the covering of the whole woman’s body except the eyes and hands. However, avoiding hypocrisy, he commenced this task with his own family– namely his own wife and daughters.

His policy of forced un-veiling was a catalyst in the advancement of Iranian society and in ending women’s slavery. By doing that, Reza Shah the Great aroused a deep animosity in fundamentalist clergies who had practically ruled the country during the previous Qajar Dynasty for 136 miserable years. He rightfully considered the hijab the emblem of an obsolete tradition which aimed to hinder Iranian women from equal life opportunities. His wholehearted efforts encouraged women to pursue higher education and to work outside the home.

His successor, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, continued to respond positively to the aspirations of Iranian women for a full emancipation in 1962. The late Shah of Iran implemented one of his greater policies, “The White Revolution,” which among other achievements, ratified very impressive women’s rights measures, ahead of all other Middle Eastern nations and even sooner than a few European countries.

The White Revolution introduced the massive “Family Protection Law” that was absolutely designed in favor of Iranian women: the right to be elected in various government ranks and posts, the right to divorce, the restriction of polygamy, and the increase in marriage age for girls from 15 to 18. In short, Iranian women up to the Islamic Revolution enjoyed a high degree of equality with men. There were female ministers, ambassadors, mayors, college professors, judges, parliamentarians and even military officers.

In the last parliamentary elections during the monarchical government in 1978, a year before the Islamic Revolution, millions of Iranian women voted. Out of 99 female candidates, 19 were elected to the parliament (Majlis) and two to the Senate. Women were also appointed to the government in new posts as Minister of State for Women’s Affairs and Minister of State for Education. Women were playing an increasingly active role in public life through obtaining higher education, which enabled women to acquire better jobs. They were entering the job market in a much wider range of fields and at higher levels of skill and competence.

Most of the present clergies’ animosity toward the Pahlavi monarchs resulted from these policies, which emancipated Iranian women who had been deprived of basic human rights for almost 14 centuries since the Muslim conquest. The Islamic theocracy perceived such actions as an affront against the sanctities of Islam.

Iran after the Islamic Revolution

With the Islamic Revolution of 1979 in Iran, clergies in Tehran immediately and severely curtailed the laws established under the White Revolution, including the Family Protection Law in favor of women, which was repealed. Today in Iran under Islamic law, gender equality is practically non-existent. Women are required to obey the Islamic law of wearing the hijab, otherwise they are subject to the severe punishment of lashing and days in prison. Islamic law specifies that women are banned from wearing perfume or shaking hands with males. Women who wear lipstick are detained and their lips are cut with blades or broken glass. Many women’s faces have been permanently scarred by acid, thrown in their faces by Islamic fascist secret police. Women have been barred from judging positions. Islamic laws consider legal testimony by women to be half as valuable as legal testimony by men.

There is absolute segregation of the sexes in any place out of the home, including schools. Education in grade school for girls overly emphasizes moral and religious teaching. In any gathering at colleges and universities, female students must be seated in the back of lecture halls, or else curtains may often divide lecture rooms. A female student must pose her question to the instructor in writing so as not to be heard by male students or male instructors, who may be “excited” by the voice of the female students.

The dark-age institutions of polygamy and temporary marriage have also been reinstated. Islamic law allows a man to have four “permanent” and as many “temporary” wives as he desires, and of course without his first wife’s permission. The legal age of marriage for girls has been dropped to 9. Women have forfeited the right to unconditional divorce, while a man can divorce his wife whenever he wishes to do so.  The custody of children, regardless of their age, is always with the father.

These grave injustices of the Islamic clergies in Iran toward women began a few days after they seized control of the country and brought the first deaths of brave Iranian women, such as Dr. Farokhroo Parsa, Minister of the State of Education, who was accused of corruption for allowing Iranian educators to teach and promote the awareness of their natural rights to millions of young Iranian girls in schools. She was put in a sack and brutally beaten and stoned to death by the Islamic fundamentalists who carried out the so-called Islamic Revolution. Many thousands of female journalists, administrators, college professors, civil servants, etc., were discharged, arrested or executed.

Despite all the hostilities expressed by the Islamic governing system, Iranian women have not compromised their aspirations; they teach their daughters that no one can force them to live under the hijab, and they do not yield to the false role of a second-class citizen who is inferior to men. The resilience and constant rebellion of Iranian women under 38 years of the cruelest Islamic dictatorship is truly due to their knowledge of and admiration for the accomplishments of their predecessors. This psyche originated in the exalted status of women of ancient Persia and was rejuvenated in the Pahlavi era by Reza Shah the Great when the law of un-veiling was nationally instituted (the 6th day of January, 1935). Not surprisingly, the clerical regime has a hard time appeasing Iranian women by comparing their condition to that of women living in Saudi Arabia. The regime often prides itself on being more progressive than the latter government, but Iranian women remember their past rights and accomplishments during the Pahlavi monarchs’ system of governing.

 

Mansour Kashfi, Ph.D., is President of Kashex International Petroleum Consulting and is a college professor in Dallas, Texas. He has over 50 years experience in petroleum exploration, primarily about Iran. He also has authored more than 100 articles and books about petroleum geology, the oil and gas industry, and market behavior.