The More Things Change and All That Jazz
I've been reading a huge book of George Orwell's essays. Besides being a great writer and thinker, he was a pretty good political analyst. He wasn't always right in his predictions, and as of 1943, where I am in the book, he's still a committed socialist, which colored both his political and literary analysis. Many of his essays are essential reading, but I just finished one called, "
No, Not One", so that's the one I'm currently fixated on. It's actually a book review, but he uses the review as an attack on pacifism. He also regularly savages the Left and communists, which makes me wonder how he still could have been such a fan of a utopian worldwide socialism, especially since in another essay, he trashes
utopias and utopian schemes.
But, getting back to his attack on pacifism,
The notion that you can somehow defeat violence by submitting to it is simply a flight from fact. As I have said, it is only possible to people who have money and guns between themselves and reality. But why should they want to make this flight, in any case? Because, rightly hating violence, they do not wish to recognize that it is integral to modern society and that their own fine feelings and noble attitudes are all the fruit of injustice backed up by force. They do not want to learn where their incomes come from. Underneath this lies the hard fact, so difficult for many people to face, that individual salvation is not possible, that the choice before human beings is not, as a rule, between good and evil but between two evils. You can let the Nazis rule the world; that is evil; or you can overthrow them by war, which is also evil. There is no other choice before you, and whichever you choose you will not come out with clean hands. It seems to me that the text for our times is not “Woe to him through whom the evil cometh” but the one from which I took the title of this article, “There is not one that is righteous, no, not one”. We have all touched pitch, we are all perishing by the sword. We do not have the chance, in a time like this, to say “Tomorrow we can all start being good”. That is moonshine. We only have the chance of choosing the lesser evil and of working for the establishment of a new kind of society in which common decency will again be possible. There is no such thing as neutrality in this war.
How does this relate to today's clash of civilizations? Where the Nazis left off, Islam stepped in. And yes, I know that we're not supposed to accuse others that we disagree with of being Nazis, but if the Jew-hatred, and quest for world domination, and belief that you are the master race deserving and destined to rule over all others, and demands that the rest of the world bow to your constant demands of "sensitivity" as you rationalize the subjugation of your own women and all those who don't believe as you do shoe fits, then wear it.
But were not supposed to look at Islam that way. We're supposed to reach out to the Taliban, Al-Queda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and all of the other terrorist organizations and their offshoots so that they will want to live in peace with us. We're not supposed to point out that that tactic hasn't worked since the beginning of Islam, nor has it ever worked against any other totalitarian ideology. Tyrants and other power mongers welcome pacifists on the other side of course, as they are useful tools.
Just as Orwell had them pegged in 1943, he still has the pacifists pegged today.
Labels: George Orwell, islam, literature, Nazis, pacifism, politics, reading
European Anti-Semitism
Did anti-Semitism in Europe end with the demise of the Third Reich, only to be reborn with increased Islamic immigration to Europe? Or did it merely go underground, seething and waiting until the time was right to once again take prominence in the minds of the European populace? I don't know. But I know that if I were a Jew living in Europe, even one of the supposedly free and democratic western European countries, I would pack up my family and make Aliyah. The
reaction of European governments to the recent Gaza flotilla was monstrous. It has also been noted that England, the country, that thanks to Winston Churchill, stood fast against the Nazis in Europe's darkest hour, had strict quotas for Jews and rather than admit them during the dark days of the Shoah, sent Jews trying to escape the Nazis back to the continent to be liquidated. And of course during the 30s and 40s they tried to keep Jews out of the holy land.
England hasn't changed much since then, except for the worse. With all the fuss they made over forged British passports used to assassinate a Hamas terrorist in Dubai because they assumed the Israelis made the hit, they're
strangely silent on the use of forged British passports used by Russian spies. As they continue to bend over further and further on their journey to dhimmitude, their natural animus against Jews has returned. How bad is it? Let
Debbie Schlussel fill you in on the latest.
So, it’s no surprise that a British judge and jury said that vandalism–destruction that could have killed many and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars–is okay . . . so long as it’s against the Jews or Israel (or someone doing business with or helping them). It’s really not too different than laws the Nazis had in place. And that’s no hyperbole.
The ends justifies the means, Judenrein-style. Yup, 1940 Europe repeats itself 70 years later. Today, they use the euphemism “Israel” as their excuse, but tomorrow, they’ll openly use the word “Jew”:
Five activists who caused £180,000 damage to an arms factory were acquitted after they argued they were seeking to prevent Israeli war crimes.
The five were jubilant after a jury found them not guilty of conspiring to cause criminal damage to the factory on the outskirts of Brighton.
Yeah, go read the whole thing. And remember, this is Great Britain. There have been a few times in the last few years when I thought that England would wake up from its slumber and fight the enemy in its midst. I don't think so any longer. At some point, leftists in the United States who didn't care what was happening over there will be trying to bargain with the British Islamic mullahs in order to have the art treasures (more important than people to some) of the various British museums kept out of harms way, and perhaps moved to a safe (for the moment) haven in the U.S.
Some people have been trying to figure out
why Europe hates Israel.
The Europeans' vicious attacks on Israel are animated less by the Jewish state's foreign policy than by Europe's ongoing fixation on the Holocaust. What else could explain the presence of posters equating Israel with Nazi Germany at pro-Hamas demonstrations in Vienna? According to one recent German university study, 45.7 percent of the European respondents supported the contention that "Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians."
In their eyes, apparently, maintaining a naval blockade against a government sworn to destroy you – while providing the unfortunate people living under that government with tens of thousands of tons of supplies and humanitarian aid – now equates to looting and butchering six million people.
Click here to find out more!
Wolfgang Benz, the controversial director of the Berlin Center for the study of anti-Semitism, neatly summed up this incongruity on German television when he insisted that "anti-Semitism is different from anti-Zionism."
Benz embraces the European wish to alleviate guilt by denying the weight of the Holocaust. (As the head of a center for the study of anti-Semitism, he's a particularly strange case; the German political scientist Clemens Heni discovered that Benz's beloved academic mentor was the now-deceased Karl Bosl, an outspoken Nazi who contributed enormously to spreading Hitler's ideology.)
Of course, nothing Israel has ever done can even begin to compare to the crimes of the Shoah. But to help alleviate their feelings of guilt, Europeans delegitimize Israel, ignore modern anti-Semitism, and portray Muslims – who number over one billion and whom no one seeks to eradicate from the earth – as the new persecuted Jews of Europe.
Some of that may be true, but after 1500 years of persecution, I think it has become ingrained into the European psyche. And then there's the new European (and generally Western) secular cowardice. Their ancestors unapologetically conquered the world and forced their morals and ethics - for good or bad - on those they conquered. Some of that conquest was done in the name of Christianity. So what. No matter how much anyone insists that there is, there is no moral equivalence between Western/Christian imperialism, and Islamic imperialism. That should be clear by looking at the results of both. The fruits of one over time is freedom and prosperity. The other has only spread barbarism and intolerance.
The secular descendants of European warriors quiver in fear, because to admit that unassimilated Muslim immigrants are destroying the Western freedom that their brave ancestors fought for and bestowed upon them, would be seen as racism and "islamophobia". They never had to work for their own freedom. It was unearned and so it means nothing. Until it's gone. Then it will be mourned by some. They will wonder what happened. But, it's better to shut up and be conquered without fighting back than to be thought a racist. Besides there are always the Jews to blame.
UPDATE: I almost forgot this article about the situation and the possible use of "
decoy Jews" in Brussels.
In an effort to arrest the culprits who terrorize Jews, the Amsterdam authorities have ordered police officers to walk the streets disguised as Jews. The Dutch police already disguise officers as “decoy prostitutes, decoy gays and decoy grannies” to deter muggings and attacks on prostitutes, homosexuals and the elderly. Apparently sending out the decoys has helped reduce street crime. The “decoy Jew” has now been added to the police attributes.
Go ahead, read it and weep - or laugh. I mostly laughed at the insanity of it all. I'm sure decoy Jews will help solve the problem. Actually, if everybody dressed up as orthodox Jews . . .
Labels: "islamophobia", anti-semitism, Debbie Schlussel, Gaza Flotilla, Great Britain, islam, Israel, Muslim anti-semitism, Muslims, Nazis
Who's a Nazi?
The aspect of today's liberalism, or progressivism as it is sometimes referred to, that helped shove me toward a more conservative political point of view, in fact it is the thing that outraged me the most in this post 9/11 world and actually began my move rightward, is the knee jerk
anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian stance among so many progressive adherents. It shocked me at first. I was used to seeing anti-Semitism coming from the right. I was always under the impression that those on the Left fought for the underdog, while those on the Right were for the rich and powerful. If there is one group who has been the historical underdog, it's been the Jews. And Israel, that miniscule strip of land on the Mediterranean, surrounded by five hundred million Arabs who nurse genocidal dreams against the Jewish state so foul that murderers are celebrated and lionized, while children are sacrificed if it means killing even one Jew, is the feistiest of underdogs, facing attacks unprecedented in history.
Yes, there is anti-Semitism on the right of the political aisle too, but except for Pat Buchanan and a few others, it isn't nearly as mainstream as that coming from the left. For the most part, it is still reviled on the right as a mental disorder and the sign of a twisted mind.
Due to some fancy propaganda from Islamic nations and a moral weakness among Progressive leaders, Israel has been absurdly portrayed as the the aggressor in this situation with no regard as to how many violent, unprovoked attacks it's had to endure over the years. The inversion of good and evil that has taken place in Progressive groups and media runs counter to the facts and counter to reality. There is a general acceptance of the Palestinian "narrative" as a replacement for objective (or as objective as it can be) history. And no matter how they try to deny it, or dress it up as anti-Zionism, or bring up the fact that there are some Jews who buy into this madness, in its rewriting of history and inversion of morality, it is anti-Semitism, pure and twisted.
Even those who aren't anti-semitic have bought into the current anti-Semitism being promoted throughout the Islamic world. They don't dig into their beliefs to see where they come from. Their self-willed ignorance gives them the strength of their convictions. For those who do plunge into the history of Islamic and European Jew-hatred and notice the ancient blood libels being updated, the explanation is that it is the fault of
Israel, you know, that tiny sliver of land, about the size of New Jersey, population of around 7 million, a country that under normal circumstances would scarcely be noticed except for the fact that it is the only majority Jewish nation on Earth. But anti-Semitism, like other dysfunctions, is blamed on who? Why, as always, it's blamed on the Jews, or now, since Progressives refuse to take responsibility for their irrational hatred, it's blamed on the Jewish state.
The second unforgivable sin of the Israelis is the fact that they have created wealth through the adoption of Capitalism in the midst of dysfunctional dictatorial Islamic cultures. Notice, I did not say that Israel has amassed wealth. They created that wealth where previously there was very little. And they did it in spite of almost universal condemnation and continuous violent attacks from their Jew-hating, dysfunctional neighbors.
One of the more twisted and offensive tactics of the anti-Semitic left is the attempted relabeling of people which goes beyond confounding good and evil. Some of the more deranged have gone so far as to equate Israel with Nazis and name the Palestinians as the new Jews. But over time, this got me thinking about the way these people think. I'm going to do a lot of generalizing (as if I haven't already), but I think my generalizations are correct . . . in general.
Those who demonize Israel imagine themselves on the side of goodness and morality, no matter how ignorant they force themselves to be. I'm guessing that they imagine that if they lived in Germany back in the 1930s that they would have been part of the brave few that spoke up against the Third Reich. I bet they really believe that they would have bravely hidden their Jewish neighbors, that they would have risked their lives to do what was right.
But they wouldn't. They would have been boycotting Jewish businesses, turning in their Jewish neighbors, cheering as they were being carted away, and ignoring the awful truths of the death camps.
And here's why.
Progressivism, due to the Marxist leanings of . . . well, of . . . Progressives, is also profoundly, proudly, and stupidly, anti-Capitalist. And
Marx was profoundly anti-Semitic. How that stance leads to progress of any kind is beyond me, but that's not what I'm writing about today. In Germany of the 1930s, there were wealthy Jews, doctors, lawyers, merchants, who wanted nothing more than to be accepted as Germans. Many downplayed their Judaism. Some even converted in order to be more a part of mainstream German society, and to spare their children the hatred they faced their whole lives. Did it work? Well, according to Nazi racial policy, you were Jewish if one grandparent was a Jew. So there really was no escape. And if you were wealthy besides, well what a scapegoat you could be.
Not all Jews were or are wealthy, but that's one of the age old stereotypes. And if one rich Jew can be found, then they all must be rich. They are rather clannish, we're told. And we know that according to the Progressives who condemn Capitalism, wealth is never earned, it is always stolen. From whom is it stolen? It is stolen from the poor. Do the poor really have anything one can steal? They must have at one time. When? Who knows? Maybe before the Jews, or Zionists, or Capitalists stole it from them.
Just as they hate Israel today for being Jewish, strong, and wealthy, they would have hated Jews back in the 1930s for the same reason. Strong and wealthy is bad. Poor and weak (in appearance if not in reality) is good. They worship (in retrospect only) the poor, weak Jews of the Holocaust. That is how their brains work. Just as they accept every anti-Israel canard, no matter how ridiculous and unprovable, they would have accepted every piece of propaganda coming down from the Third Reich. The lies are the same. Nazis fraudulently claimed that Jews "
stabbed Germany in the back" during WWI. They were outraged over the fact that
some Jews became wealthy. They accused Jews of trying to
control the world (not just the Middle East) They were -ahem -
anti-Zionists. Remind me. Who takes those positions these days? I don't think most Israelis do. And don't forget the ancient blood libels, now resurrected throughout the Muslim world and in mainstream
Swedish newspapers.
There is no logic behind the Israel hating stance, there is only a burning hatred that comes from envy and a strong desire to make sure that nobody is allowed to become too wealthy or as the term is used, "obscenely wealthy," especially if they're Jewish. It's the same burning hatred that ran rampant through Germany in the 1930s, the demonization, the calls for boycotts of Jewish businesses, the personal attacks on Jews and their property. I'm not claiming that Progressives are in favor of reopening the death camps. I am claiming though, that when Jews are murdered in Israel, or anywhere for that matter, when synagogues are vandalized, the silence from the Left demonstrates that they care as much as the average German citizen cared when those oppressive Jews of Berlin, and Frankfort, and Hamburg, were forced to wash the streets to cheering crowds and later carted away. And who in the West is demanding divestiture from and the boycotting of Israeli businesses and the country of Israel itself? As I recall, it's those loving, human-rights-demanding Progressives.
All of the excuses the "good Germans" made are made by today's Progressives. But in order to be able to face themselves when they look in the mirror, they have to create a morally inverted world where terrorists who gleefully murder children are called "freedom fighters" and the society that raises them and cheers these murders is called "oppressed". The one country in the Middle East that has allowed its citizens to create a decent standard of living is condemned in the stupidest and most offensive manner. But then again, it is the Jewish country. And as much as they deny it, that is what it comes down to when Progressives decide who their devil is.
They've taken the same positions that Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Nazis take. They fail to see the hypocrisy in their position which claims Muslims can murder Jews as a basic human right while Jews who fight back are oppressive. And as one last thought, let us not forget that Nazis were officially known in Germany as National Socialists. That's kind of far left, isn't it?
Labels: human rights, Israel, Jews, Muslims, Nazis, Progressives, the Left
For the Love of Despots
A friend of mine is trying to talk her son out of applying to Harvard. They gave a platform to former Iranian President
Khatami. Of course, David Ellwood, the dean of Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, had the noblest of motives for inviting an Islamic tyrant to Harvard:
``Do we listen to those that we disagree with, and vigorously challenge them, or do we close our ears completely?" said David Ellwood, the Kennedy School's dean, in an interview with the Globe.
My, how inspirational. I wonder if Ellwood's challenge to Khatami did any good. I doubt it. But this isn't the first questionable guest to speak at Harvard. Back in the 1930s, Harvard was quite a welcoming campus to
Nazis.
The Harvard University administration during the 1930s, led by President James Conant, ignored numerous opportunities to take a principled stand against the Hitler regime and the antisemitic outrages it perpetrated, and contributed to Nazi Germany's efforts to improve its image in the West. The administration's lack of concern about Nazi antisemitism was shared by many influential Harvard alumni and students. A faculty panel that supervised a mock trial of Hitler in 1934 ruled that Hitler's anti-Jewish actions were "irrelevant" to the debate. Nazi leaders were warmly welcomed to the Harvard campus and invited to prestigious social events, as the Harvard administration strove to build friendly relations with thoroughly Nazified universities in Germany. By doing so, Harvard's administration and many of its student leaders offered important encouragement to the Hitler regime as it intensified its persecution of the Jews and strengthened its armed forces.
And that was only the beginning. Read the rest of the article and see how far Harvard actually sunk. And we must not forget another anti-Semitic episode at
Harvard.
In 1922, Harvard's president, A. Lawrence Lowell, proposed a quota on the number of Jews gaining admission to the university. Lowell was convinced that Harvard could only survive if the majority of its students came from old American stock. Lowell argued that cutting the number of Jews at Harvard to a maximum of 15% would be good for the Jews, because limits would prevent further anti-Semitism. Lowell reasoned, “The anti-Semitic feeling among the students is increasing, and it grows in proportion to the increase in the number of Jews. If their number should become 40% of the student body, the race feeling would become intense.”
Oops! It was for our own good. My apologies to Harvard for questioning its motives. I'm sure Iran wants to nuke Israel "for its own good" too. Their biggest fault is that they care too much for Jews. Just like Stephen Walt. To Harvard's credit, they've distanced themselves from
Walt.
And then there's Columbia University, who invited the current president of Iran,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak. There was quite a debate going at the time, but in the end, he spoke at Columbia. And hey, guess what, back in the 1930s, Columbia (in the interests of free speech, I'm sure) also had ties to the
Nazis.
* Columbia invited Nazi ambassador Hans Luther to speak on campus in 1933 (about Hitler's "peaceful intentions") and university president Nicholas Murray Butler hosted a reception for him;
* Columbia continued student exchanges with Nazi-controlled German universities in the 1930s, even after a Nazi official characterized German exchange students as "political soldiers of the Reich";
* Columbia sent a delegate to a celebration at the University of Heidelberg in 1936, even after it had been purged of Jewish faculty members, instituted a Nazi curriculum, and hosted a burning of books by Jewish authors; and
* Columbia permanently expelled student Robert Burke after he led an anti-Nazi rally outside President Butler's mansion.
But we shouldn't make a big deal out of it because,
Columbia Provost Alan Brinkley told the online journal Inside Higher Ed (Nov. 27): "If the events that Professor Norwood describes are examples of ‘collaboration,’ then the collaborators include many thousands of leaders and citizens of the United States, Britain, and many other nations."
In other words, "Everyone-was-doing-it, so don't blame us."
This is not a condemnation of American higher education. I'm just questioning the morality of those in charge of two prestigious American universities. They do seem to love their dictators. And don't forget
Larry Summers was
purgedfrom Harvard for not toeing the official party line. Why do they have to make excuses to give platforms to thugs and murderers? I think I would try to talk my children out of going to either of those universities too.
Labels: Ahmadinejad, Columbia University, Harvard, Larry Summers, Nazis
Two Murderous Covenants
I swiped this little comparison chart from the invaluable
Smoothstone. It should be posted everywhere.
| THE PLO COVENANT | THE NAZI COVENANT |
Palestine is an INDIVISIBLE part of the homeLAND of the ARABS and the Palestinians are an INTEGRAL part of the ARAB NATION | We demand the UNION of all GERMANS to form a GREAT GERMANY |
| Palestine is the home LAND of the Palestinian PEOPLE | We demand LAND and TERRITORY for our PEOPLE |
The Palestinians are those ARABS born of a Palestinian FATHER
The Palestine CHARACTERISTIC is TRANSMITTED from PARENTS to children | None but those of GERMAN BLOOD whatever their creed, may be MEMBERS of the NATION or CITIZENS of the STATE |
| JEWS who had resided in Palestine UNTIL the BEGINNING of the invasion of the ZIONIST invasion (Aliyah 1882) will be considered Palestinains | JEWS therefore, may not be a member of the RACE
NON GERMANS are forthwith required to DEPART from the REICH |
| and requires ALL States to consider ZIONISM illegitimate and to OUTLAW its EXISTENCE | We demand the DEATH of the CRIMINALS against the nation |
| The Balfour Declaration the Mandate and Partition of Palestine are illegal and deemed NULL and VOID | We demand the ABOLITION of the PEACE TREATIES (Versailles) |
| The Palestine Liberation Organization is responsible for the struggle and will perform its ROLE in the realization of the GOALS of this Charter | The LEADERS of the NAZI Party demand unquestioned AUTHORITY and swear to go on to secure fulfillment of the POINTS of this Programme |
| The COVENANT shall NOT BE AMENDED | This Covenant is declared to be UNALTERABLE |
| CAIRO 1968 | MUNICH 1920 |
Article 2 Defines Palestine as an indivisible territorial unit with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate 1920 including Trans Jordan
THE ARTICLES ARE ABSTRACTED FROM THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL COVENANT ENGLISH RENDITION PUBLISHED BY THE PLO RESEARCH CENTRE BEIRUT 1969
THE POINTS ARE ABSTRACTED FROM NATIONAL SOCIALISM BY ROBERT MURPHY - DOCUMENT THE PROGRAMME OF THE PARTY OF HITLER ENGLISH RENDITION BY E.T.S. DUGDALE MUNICH (NACHFOLGER) 1932
YOU BE THE JUDGE
From the CANADIAN JEWISH HERALD TISHRI 5741 - OCT. 1980 INTERIM PEACE EDITION, page 126
UPDATE It's kind of messed up when I read it on my computer (due to this template, I think), so I'm going to assume that everyone else is going to have the same problem. Your best bet just might be to read it
here.
Labels: Islamic-Nazi axis, Nazis, PLO, Smoothstone
The beginning of the reckoning
You have to read
this piece by Caroline Glick on the history of Islamic/Nazi cooperation. Make sure you watch the video. It's ugly, but informative. After seeing it, I have to ask, why haven't the Muslim terror masters, terror preachers, and terror supporters embraced Multiculturalism?
Answer: Because they're not stupidly suicidal, like the Left and MSM, they're homicidal.
Labels: Carolyn Glick, islam, multiculturalism, Nazis
Who Are the New Nazis?
It's become all to fashionable in some circles to ask if the Israelis are the "new Nazis" and the Palestinians are the "new Jews". The answer to that question is: No, you idiot!
By using the term "idiot" to describe someone who asks that question, I'm not questioning the intelligence of those asking. I'm doubting their honesty and their knowledge of recent (since the 1930s or so) history. Let's see why. We can examine some parallels and differences between the different groups (Jews, Palestinians, and Nazis) and different time periods.
1. In the 1930s the Jews wanted to live in peace and the Nazis wanted to blame all of their problems on the Jews. The Nazis managed to murder entire Jewish communities and destroy a large portion of world Jewry.
Today the Jews want to live in peace and the Palestinians want to blame all of their problems on the Jews. The Palestinians have killed some Jews but not as many as the Nazis did. This is because they haven't been able to build a civilization that would allow them the technology needed for that kind of destruction. They are trying to buy it though.
2. In the 1930s, most of the world thought that if they only acquiesced to some of the Nazi demands, you know, give them Czechoslovakia, and maybe Austria, and oh just a piece of Poland . . . and let them kill the Jews, the Nazis wouldn't bother them any more.
Today, most of the world thinks that if they acquiesce to the Palestinians and just give them Israel and let them kill the Jews, the Palestinians won't bother them any more.
Since it didn't work with the Nazis, why do people think it will work with the Palestinians?
3. In the 1930s and 40s, the Palestinians (who weren't Palestinians yet, but that's grist for another post) actively supported the Nazis, as did most Arab nations.
Today the pathetic remnants of the Nazis support the Palestinian efforts to destroy Israel.
4. In the 1930s the Jews were defenseless and at the mercy of their anti-semitic neighbors who (except for a few brave exceptions) either actively helped the Nazi murderers or watched silently as the Nazis did their dirty work.
Today the Jews have their own country. They don't have to depend on the largesse of their neighbors. They are fighting back. And they're winning. And that's upsetting the current appeasers and anti-semites. The anti-semites will deny their Jew hatred and pretend they're only criticizing the policies of the Sharon government, but they allow every country on Earth the right to defend themselves except the one majority Jewish nation. Coincidence? I doubt it.
In conclusion, the Jews are still the Jews, but they're done being victimized, much to the chagrin of those anti-semitic mental midgets. The Palestinians are the new Nazis. You can see that from the photo in the previous post, which was supposed to be in this post, but I'm still learning how to do all of this.
Labels: Israel, Jews, Nazis, Palestinians
Here are some Palestinian Fatah terrorists saluting in the manner of a famous German political party that came to prominence in the 1930s, murdered six million Jews and millions of Catholics, Gypsies, and other undesirables in the 1940s, laid waste to Europe, and was run by a twisted psychopath with a tiny moustache. They called themselves Nazis.
Labels: Fatah, Nazis, Palestinians
War's legitimate object is more perfect peace. Flavius Vegitius Renatus
This is an optional footer. If you want text here, place it inside these tags, and remove this comment.
CHALLAH AKBAR
