Dashnaktsutyun Thinks Republican President Not Beneficial

DASHNAKTSUTYUN THINKS REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT IS NOT BENEFICIAL

Lragir, Armenia
July 27 2007

The Republican Party got absolute majority in the parliamentary
election, but it does not necessarily determine the outcome of the
presidential election, Armen Rustamyan, representative of the ARF
Dashnaktsutyun’s Supreme Body, stated July 27 at the National Press
Club. "It is stated directly or indirectly that the outcome of the
parliamentary election will affect symmetrically the outcome of the
presidential election. I think this is not the right forecast regarding
the political developments and the current situation in Armenia."

He thinks the electoral system in Armenia has faults, such as vote
tampering or intimidation. "And this is the reason why the voters
do not use their right to vote fully. This right is either tampered
or taken away under pressure. Both methods are used in Armenia one
way or another. And it will take us long to get rid of this," Armen
Rustamyan says. According to him, the presidential election will also
have faults. "For the time being, we will make efforts to reduce these
faults. There is an important circumstance, however, which will make
the presidential election different from the parliamentary election,"
Armen Rustamyan says. According to him, this circumstance is that the
faults of the electoral system are revealed especially in the voting
under the majority system, meanwhile the presidential election is
closer to the voting under the proportional system when the entire
country is one electoral district.

"And I think it can affect the outcome of the presidential election
and also make the conduct of the voting to president more political.

And this is the underlying issue," says the representative of the
ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s Supreme Body. According to him, it is essential
to the future of the state to hold a better presidential election
than the parliamentary election. Armen Rustamyan reasserted that
Dashnaktsutyun will name its own candidate, and considering his
partisan experience, Armen Rustamyan assured that the candidate will
be a member of the party. However, he declined to mention names. He
says the Supreme Meeting will name the candidate. Armen Rustamyan only
says Dashnaktsutyun will not support another candidate and will not
name a candidate from another party but will name its own candidate.

The representative of the Supreme Body of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun Armen
Rustamyan repeated the ARF Bureau member Vahan Hovanisyan’s statement
he had made a few weeks ago that a non-Republican president will
help sustain the balance of powers. In this sense, Armen Rustamyan
contradicts to the Republican speaker of the National Assembly Tigran
Torosyan. Torosyan said in an interview with the Aravot Daily on
July 27 that after the adoption of amendments to the Constitution the
president is strong if he has the support of the parliament majority.

"The ideas of government vary. Because if we imagine the administrative
force, the force of the administrative resource of the government,
if we think that the state must be like a mechanism for pressure,
in this sense the authoritarian government is the strongest. However,
we know how such governments end up, how it happens," Armen Rustamyan
says, mentioning that the force of the government must first of all
rely on true concepts and public confidence. "Armenia lacks this most
of all and needs such a government," Armen Rustamyan says. He says
in this sense we will benefit if the president, the prime minister
and the parliament majority belong to the same force.

BAKU: PACE Mission On Monitoring Of Cultural Monuments Due To Visit

PACE MISSION ON MONITORING OF CULTURAL MONUMENTS DUE TO VISIT THE REGION

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
July 26 2007

The mission led by PACE’s co-rapporteur on monitoring of cultural
monuments in Northern Caucasus,UK parliamentarian Edvard Ohara will
visit the region late in August ,Edvard Ohara told the APA. The
mission’s visit will last one week.

PACE mission will visit Baku, Yerevan, Tbilisi, Nagorno Karabakh
and Nakhchivan AR within the framework of the visit. The mission
will cooperate with local experts while conducting monitoring of
cultural monuments.

OP-ED: GW’s Shameful Affiliations

OP-ED: GW’S SHAMEFUL AFFILIATIONS
By Alison Tahmizian Meuse

Daily Colonial, DC
George Washington University
April 25 2007

Have you ever wondered what goes on behind the scenes at GW? Have
you ever taken the time to look into our university’s political and
financial commitments? Well I have, and I am distressed to report
that the hands of our administration are filthy.

My individual awareness to such matters began when it came to the
attention of the Armenian Students Network that GW holds a membership
in the American Turkish Council (ATC). While the ATC has many positive
goals in regards to promoting Turkish interests in the US, one of its
more touchy objectives is to block the Armenian Genocide resolution
in the United States Congress. As an Armenian whose grandparents
were forced to flee Turkey in the face of systematic massacres
and deportations, it was rather revolting to discover that my own
university is a party to such an objective. President Trachtenberg is
to be commended for his straightforward affirmation of the genocide;
nevertheless, the university’s affiliation with the ATC derogates his
individual candor. By attaching the university’s name to such a lobby,
the GW administration is implicitly agreeing with all of the policies
and viewpoints adopted by that council. I encourage all students,
campus organizations, and faculty members to further investigate the
broader issue at hand. There is no doubt that the ATC is simply one
lobby group among many supported by our university.

Living in our nation’s capital has shown me the sway that Turkish
lobby groups exert in America. Indeed, it is groups like the ATC that
keep the Armenian Genocide out of our textbooks, despite the fact
that it was not the current Turkish government which perpetrated the
massacres. Even on April 24, when Armenians from around the world
gather to remember the deaths of loved ones, the Turks mobilize to
protest our commemoration observances. And they have that right. We
are all blessed to live in a country that permits free speech; a free
land where journalists do not fear for their lives and intellectuals
are not jailed for insulting the state. We do not have a penal code
whereby individuals are imprisoned for insulting "Americanness,"
as is the case in Turkey.

I was not compelled to write this article because I am against
Turkey. I have a dear friend who is Turkish, and I am in favor of
Turkey’s ascension to the European Union – an ongoing process that
is reforming both the government and society as a whole. Perhaps the
Turkish government will never accept the term "genocide" to describe
the events of the early twentieth century, but that seems unlikely
given that both the European Parliament and the Council of Europe
recognized the Armenian genocide years ago. The obstruction of genocide
recognition in the United States cannot be attributed to a historical
quandary on the veracity of the event; rather, it is a political
dilemma. Turkey is a crucial ally in the region; the combination of
its NATO membership, useful military bases, and positive relationship
with Israel has long forced our government to skirt the issue.

The author, a sophomore in the Elliott School, is an intern at the
Embassy of Jordan and Social Coordinator of the International Affairs
Society.

Editor’s Note: The article this story references can be found here.
;s =4231
;s =4276

http://www.dailycolonial.com/go.dc?p=3&amp
http://www.dailycolonial.com/go.dc?p=3&amp

Greeks against Turkey’s accession to the EU

Greeks against Turkey’s accession to the EU

ArmRdio.am
06.01.2007 12:51

The results of the survey conducted by `Kapa Research’ Company for `To
Vima’ newspaper revealed that about 40 percent of the population of
Greece support Turkey’s accession to the European Union, while 56.5
percent are against.

The newspaper wrote that 38.5 percent of respondents are optimistic
about the settlement of the Cyprus issue. 39.4 percent believe that
the island will be completely included in the European Union.

The US helped kill Shamil Basayev

Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
July 17, 2006 Monday
THE UNITED STATES HELPED KILL SHAMIL BASAYEV;
Turkey and Georgia also participated in the operation
by: Igor Yavlyansky
THE SHIPMENT THAT KILLED BASAYEV CAME FROM IRAQ, VIA TURKEY AND
GEORGIA; By consulting experts and studying open sources, we have
attempted to analyze where the consignment of weapons originated,
the route it took to Ingushetia – and who might have helped deliver
it to the addressee, Shamil Basayev, complete and undamaged.
We continue our own investigation into the circumstances of Shamil
Basayev’s death. This time, by consulting experts and studying open
sources, we have attempted to analyze where the consignment of weapons
originated, the route it took to Ingushetia – and who might have helped
deliver it to the addressee, Shamil Basayev, complete and undamaged.
The weapons shipment contained a detonator, planted by the Federal
Security Service (FSB). Where did the shipment originate? Our
impression is that this operation was launched by President Vladimir
Putin himself. In an Interfax news agency report from July 11, an
unidentified expert described as a Russian special services veteran
declined to answer when asked to name the country from which Basayev’s
weapons consignment came, but recommended “a close analysis of media
reports over the past two months” about contacts between Russia’s
top leaders and representatives of other countries.
So we went ahead and did that. What catches the eye immediately is the
frequency of contacts between President Vladimir Putin and President
George W. Bush. They spoke by phone on May 1, May 30, June 5, June 19,
and July 6. In all these conversations, according to official reports,
one of the most important topic was the war on terrorism.
On June 6, a day after talking to Bush, Putin met with former US
Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Most likely, Kissinger wasn’t fully
informed about what was happening; but Putin directed his remarks at
the television cameras as well as at Kissinger.
“Our views don’t always coincide, but we understand each other and find
a compromise,” Putin said to Kissinger. “Of course, our cooperation
in the area of fighting terrorism remains fairly urgent.
I spoke to the President of the United States by phone only
yesterday. We maintain permanent contacts at practically all levels
and between all state agencies.”
With the “prompt” provided by the unnamed special services source,
Putin’s words here may well be interpreted as a hint at meetings
between Russian and US intelligence agencies.
Now let’s approach this from another angle. Where was the weapons
consignment put together? In his report to Putin, FSB Director Nikolai
Patrushev said: “This operation became possible thanks to the fact
that operative positions had been established abroad, primarily in
those countries where weapons were assembled and subsequently sent
to Russia.”
In this context, the word “assembled” clearly doesn’t refer to the
factory production process; it refers to the location where the
weapons consignment was put together before being shipped to Basayev.
One of the experts we consulted pointed out that Chechen guerrillas
always say they acquire their weapons from the Russian military.
Undoubtedly, such incidents do happen sometimes; but our source
maintains that there’s more talk than evidence of Russian military
personnel selling arms to the guerrillas. And this is where the talk
originates: Soviet-made weapons could fall into terrorist hands not
only from Russian military storehouses, but also from other countries
that bought such weapons from Russia or the Soviet Union.
Given this and other abovementioned factors, the experts we consulted
consider the leading theory to be as follows: the weapons consignment
was probably collected in Iraq. The situation there resembles
Dudayev-era Chechnya: a devastated society in which former military
personnel are selling off entire arsenals. Such things also happen
in the Balkans, but we rejected that option, since the weapons there
are all Yugoslav- or Chinese-made. And the specialists we consulted
pointed to Iraq, where the former National Guard has scattered,
taking a great number of weapons.
So the shipment originated in Iraq. This is an undisputed
“responsibility zone” of the United States. Some reliable informers
might have told the Russian special services about the cargo being
assembled. But in order to make this work to Russia’s advantage,
it would have been necessary to cooperate with the Americans and
the new Iraqi special services established by the Americans – they
still have the final say in the region. The Russian special services
needed to plant a detonator in the weapons shipment, then track the
shipment’s progress all the way along its route. And that leads us
to a sensational conclusion: only America could have provided Russia
with this kind of assistance.
How was the cargo delivered to Ingushetia? We can rule out the
Iran-Armenia-Azerbaijan route. Firstly, Iran is an unfriendly zone
for terrorists. Its borders are closely monitored, to guard against
drug trafficking. Moreover, Iran is one of the few countries in
the Islamic world that has not been known to support the Chechen
separatists. Secondly, due to the continual conflicts between Armenia
and Azerbaijan, all cargo crossing the border between these two
countries is checked very thoroughly. Thirdly, there’s a shorter and
less problematic route: via Turkey and Georgia.
Turkey is a complicated country. It’s more than just a favorite
holiday destination for Russian tourists. But times change, and the
influence of the United States on Turkey is very great. If our first
conclusion (that the Americans have been helping our special services)
is correct, it would be logical to assume that they helped us reach
agreement with Turkey as well.
Next up, Georgia. Everyone is aware of Russia’s difficult relationship
with Georgia’s proud president, Mikhail Saakashvili. The power of US
influence on Saakashvili is equally well-known. But let’s not forget
the problem of the Pankisi Gorge, the terrorist bases there, and the
inconveniences this creates for Georgia. For example, the Western
European community used to have a certain amount of sympathy for the
Chechen separatists and Georgia, which supported the separatists;
but the situation has changed since the Paris trial of “Chechen
terrorists” who were planning an act of terrorism in France.
The court established that these terrorists had been trained in the
Pankisi Gorge.
Thus, having consulted experts and open sources, we conclude that the
weapons consignment was collected in Iraq; the detonator and radio
beacon were planted in the consignment in Iraq; and the consignment
was then delivered to Ingushetia via Turkey and Georgia.
There is also the possibility that the FSB’s radio beacon was planted
en route, perhaps in Georgia, rather than in Iraq – but this is
unlikely. One of Basayev’s emissaries probably took delivery of
the deadly cargo in Iraq and examined it thoroughly. His inspection
process might have involved placing secret marks on the cargo, to
make it obvious if anyone tampered with the goods along the way.
So why would Russia need to monitor the shipment’s progress and
seek a friendly attitude from the transit countries? The answer is
simple: in order to prevent any accidents. Russia had to ensure that
local special services, police, or criminals wouldn’t intercept this
important shipment, so that it could reach its designated recipient
complete and undamaged – and then fulfill its mission.
(…)
Source: Izvestia, July 14, 2006, p. 3
Translated by Elena Leonova

NA Delegation Off To Brussels To Participate In The OSCE PA Session

NA DELEGATION OFF TO BRUSSELS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE OSCE PA SESSION
ArmRadio.am
03.07.2006 14:23
RA National Assembly delegation left for Brussels to participate in
the 15th annual session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly.
The delegation is headed by NA Deputy Speaker Vahan Hovhannisyan. It
comprises also MPs Samvel Mikoyan and Artashes Geghamyan. The session
will be over on July 7, Press Service of the National Assembly informs.

EU: Demand Of Karabakh People Should Be Met

EU: DEMAND OF KARABAKH PEOPLE SHOULD BE MET
PanARMENIAN.Net
20.04.2006 01:27 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “The European Parliament considers it has not clear
“road map” to settle the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, however the EU
should take part in the solution of the issue without fail,” Chair
of the EU-Armenia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee, French MP
Marie-Anne Isler-Beguin stated at a news conference in Yerevan. In
her words, the international community wants soonest settlement
of the Karabakh conflict by peaceful tools. “The other way is just
impossible. The conflict should be solved based on the right of peoples
to self-determination and observation of national minority rights. The
demand of the Nagorno Karabakh people should be met and Azerbaijan
has to respect people’s right to self-determination,” she remarked.
The delegation head believes that the OSCE MG should find a
political compromise between the parties of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict. Marie-Anne Isler-Beguin emphasized the EP does not speak
“either of occupied, or liberated territories.” “These are the seven
regions around NK, where refugees should return and decide their
status themselves,” she underscored.
At the same time Isler-Beguin supposes the Armenian society should
be ready to living with Azerbaijanis.
At that she cited the example of France and Germany, which in spite
of past differences, are an exemplar of peaceful cooperation.

Turkey wary of EU intentions

Washington Times
Oct 1 2005
Turkey wary of EU intentions
By Sibel Utku Bila
ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey yesterday girded for a showdown with the
European Union as anger and frustration simmered over what Turks see
as European backpedaling on pledges to admit the Muslim country to
the bloc.
With just three days left before the start of membership talks,
EU countries were still wrangling over accession terms for Turkey,
leaving Ankara on edge and its decades-old dream of integrating with
Europe shrouded in uncertainty.
Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said he would not go to Luxembourg
for the start of the talks Monday if Ankara is dissatisfied with the
EU’s conditions.
“Undoubtedly, there is the risk of not starting membership
talks,” Mr. Gul conceded late Thursday. “We are facing serious
problems.”
In an 11th-hour bid for a breakthrough, the EU will hold an
emergency meeting of foreign ministers tomorrow to seek a compromise
on a negotiating framework — the guiding procedures and principles
for the talks with Turkey.
The deadlock is blamed on Austria’s insistence to offer Turkey
“privileged partnership” as an alternative to full membership, an
option Ankara flatly rejects.
Mr. Gul said he would not board the plane for Luxembourg before
seeing the final document, but remained hopeful of a compromise
despite the time pressure.
Turkey has been trying to join the EU since the 1960s, but its
place in Europe has come increasingly into question, especially since
French and Dutch voters rejected a planned EU constitution, partly
over concerns about the membership of this sizeable and relatively
poor Muslim country.
The European Parliament fueled angry accusations that the
admission bar is being deliberately raised for Turkey when it urged
Ankara earlier this week to acknowledge that the Ottoman Empire —
predecessor of the Turkish Republic — committed “genocide” against
Armenians in World War I, as a condition for joining.

Turkey Won’t Say Genocide, But U Documentary Does

TURKEY WON’T SAY GENOCIDE, BUT U DOCUMENTARY DOES
By Don M. Burrows
Minnesota Daily, MN
Sept 29 2005
University film covers controversial Armenian genocide and garners
Emmy nomination
Armenian Genocide: 90 Years Later,” takes on one of the biggest
geopolitical controversies of the 20th century, even in its title:
Was the massacre of Armenians in 1915 an act of genocide?
The Republic of Turkey, the successor state of the Ottoman Empire
that carried out the killings, denies it was genocide, and has even
banned discussion in that vein.
The documentary, co-produced by the University’s Center for Holocaust
and Genocide Studies, uses interviews with historians and family
members of survivors to continue the discussion many avoid.
PHOTO COURTESY TESSA SAVVIDIS HOFMANN AND THE CENTRE FOR INF The
photograph “Deportation from Harput,” was used in the film “Armenian
Genocide: 90 Years Later.”
What is known is this: As many as 1.5 million Armenians were killed
from 1915 to 1917 in an apparent depopulation strategy by the Young
Turk government. Much like Jews were singled out in Nazi Germany,
Armenians – an ethnic and religious minority of artisans and skilled
laborers in Turkish society – were removed from their homes and
killed. The Turkish government, however, claims the killings were
part of ethnic clashes and denies that so many were slain.
The most compelling part of the film is the testimony of those whose
families survived the killings. Many remember their parents telling of
the horrors of leaving their homes and hiding from Turkish officials,
and recount how a remembrance of the events of 1915 is now embedded
in Armenian identity.
The documentary features two University history professors, Eric
Weitz and Taner Akcam. Akcam is a Turkish historian who was jailed
in the 1970s for broaching human rights. It first aired in April and
has since been nominated for an Upper Midwest Regional Emmy award in
the News Special category.
The timing couldn’t be better.
Just last weekend, a Turkish court canceled the academic conference
that was to occur at Bogazici University regarding this topic. The
action sparked a wave of protest from European leaders and Turkish
officials wary of bad press amid their bid for entrance into the
European Union. A previous conference was likewise banned in May
amid comments from the Turkish minister of justice, who called it
treasonous.
Stephen Feinstein, director of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide
Studies, said more than 200 copies of the film have been distributed
to organizations and schools since its airing.
Feinstein said that although the current Turkish government is
different than the one that committed the slayings in 1915, it has
been defiant in recognizing it as genocide. This is despite a consensus
among genocide scholars and similar recognitions by state governments
worldwide, including the state of Minnesota. He attributes this to
fears of demanded reparations and damage to the Turkish Republic’s
grand narrative and national pride.
His main concern, and that of scholars worldwide, is that Turkey,
a supposedly free democracy, is suppressing academic discussion.
“In a democracy, you should be free to talk about the past,”
Feinstein said.
Weitz agreed, and said that while there are many Turks who accept
that genocide occurred, there are also those ideologues who fit their
denial of the genocide into their concurrent distaste for Turkey’s
entrance into the EU.
“When they challenge the ability of scholars to discuss these issues,
they are provoking the EU deliberately,” he said.
Feinstein said many documents from Turkey’s own archives prove
that a systematic killing took place, but are written in the Arabic
script that
was replaced by the Latin alphabet after World War I. Consequently,
many Turkish government officials can’t even read them.
As stated in the documentary, German records are perhaps the best
source of information on the massacres, given Germany’s alliance with
Turkey during World War I.
It was the Nazis’ knowledge of the Armenians that contributed in part
to their own policy of extermination, scholars argue.
And those involved in the now Emmy-nominated film hope it will educate
the public so as to contradict Hitler’s famous quote in defense of
his genocidal plans: “Who remembers the Armenians?”
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

“Never Remember”

“NEVER REMEMBER”
By Don Feder
FrontPage magazine.com, CA
Sept 27 2005
A committee appointed by the British government, composed of Muslims,
wants the nation to scrap its Holocaust Memorial Day, in the name of
inclusiveness and sensitivity. No word yet on whether they also want
to eliminate Passover – said to be insensitive to Egyptians.
The committee recommends replacing the observance (started in 2001
and held annually on January 27) with a Genocide (a.k.a., Victimhood)
Day, which would recognize the alleged mass murder of Muslims in
“Palestine,” Chechnya, Bosnia, and wherever else followers of the
Religion of Peace have come into conflict with the accursed infidel.
In making its case for inclusiveness, the committee somehow neglected
to mention the many victims of Muslim mayhem – Armenians, Sudanese
Christians, Kosovar Serbs (ethnically cleansed in the wake of NATO’s
war on Yugoslavia), and Hindus – to name but a few. If an Arab stubbed
his toe on the boot of a Christian knight sometime in the 11th century,
it’s a crime against humanity that must be memorialized throughout
the ages, according to the imams. On the other hand, the slaughter of
infidels is seen as the will of Allah, and worthy of a Heavenly reward.
The committee maintains that Britain’s Holocaust Memorial Day fuels
feelings of isolation and alienation among Muslim youth. And, well,
to have a special commemoration of the systematic slaughter of one
in every three Jews on earth (in an effort to annihilate an entire
people), is grossly unfair, the committee suggests.
Sir Iqbal Sacranie, secretary general of the Muslim Council of
Britain, cautions: “We can never have double standards in terms of
human life. Muslims feel hurt and excluded that their lives are not
equally valuable to those lives lost in the Holocaust time.”
Perhaps Sir Iqbal also believes that 9/11 memorials should pay homage
to the Muslims in the planes, as well as the infidels in the office
buildings – so that his coreligionists won’t feel that their lives
have less meaning.
To understand the obscenity of Iqbal’s equation of the Holocaust with
casualties in the aforesaid armed conflicts, consider the Muslims
favorite “genocide”: that supposedly inflicted on the Palestinians.
Since the onset of the latest Intifada (started and maintained by
Muslims), 4,000 Palestinians have died, out of a population of more
than 1 million. Most were combatants. At the same time, almost 1,000
Israelis have lost their lives – overwhelmingly civilians, mostly
women, children, and the elderly. Palestinian society celebrates
jihad and suicide bombings. Israeli society unilaterally relinquishes
territory in its quest for peace.
For the Palestinian/Holocaust analogy to be valid, Israel would have
to be operating death camps – herding naked Muslims into gas chambers
and burning their remains in crematoria. And Jerusalem would have to
have slaughtered every third Palestinian in the world.
Instead the Palestinian population has increased dramatically –
as has their life expectancy and standard of living – since Israel
came into possession of the territory they inhabit at the end of the
Six-Days War. To put it in Shakespearean terms, genocide should be
made of sterner stuff.
Muslims can’t stand the thought of Holocaust commemorations, because,
with certain honorable exceptions, Islam’s attitudes toward the Jews
frequently mirror those of the Nazi killers.
Islamic polemicists have three responses to the destruction of
European Jewry: 1) It never happened; 2) It happened, but the numbers
are grossly exaggerated, and Zionist leaders collaborated with the
Nazis; and 3) It happened, and the Jews, those enemies of humanity,
had it coming.
Mahmoud Abbas, capo mafioso of the Palestinian Authority and renowned
moderate, is the author of a 1983 book entitled, The Other Side:
The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and the Zionist Movement. In
it, the first president of Palestine (if Washington has its way)
maintains that Hitler killed “only a few hundred thousand Jews,” not
six million. Moreover, the Zionist leadership “was a partner in the
slaughter of the Jews” – supposedly to create sympathy for the Jews,
thus facilitating the creation of the Jewish state.
Holocaust denial is rampant in the Muslim world.
In 1964, then-Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nassar (who precipitated
the Six-Days War) insisted:, “No one…takes seriously the lie about
six million Jews who were murdered.”
In 2000, a columnist for The Syria Times wrote, “The most famous myth
is that of the so-called Holocaust… We strongly believe that gas
chambers were not used for burning (sic.) Jews.”
Also in 2000, Sheikh Adel Bin Ahmad Bana’ma, a Saudi religious
authority speaking at a Jeddah mosque, charged that Jews “disseminate
everywhere the lie of the Holocaust and claim that Hitler killed six
million Jews in gas chambers…This is pure falsehood.”
A year later, Palestinian religious leader Sheikh Ibrahim Mahdi
declared, “One of the Jews’ evil deeds has come to be called the
Holocaust.” However, the Sheikh insisted, it has been irrefutably
proven that “this crime, carried out against some of the Jews, was
planned by the Jews’ leaders.”
Like other Holocaust-deniers, those of the Islamic world aren’t just
flat-Earth cranks, but virulent anti-Semites. Except for a handful
of European skinheads and Aryan Nation types holed up in Idaho, The
Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion is still taken seriously only
among Muslims – where it’s the Harry Potter of Middle East publishing.
This Czarist forgery (which purports to expose a Jewish conspiracy to
control humanity) is ubiquitous in jihad land. Saudi Arabia’s late
King Faisal often gave copies to foreign visitors. Yasser Arafat
was a fan. Arab periodicals quote it religiously, to demonstrate
the perfidy of the Jews. In 2002, Egyptian television broadcast a
41-episode, dramatized version of The Protocols, entitled. “Horseman
Without A Horse.”
The roots of Islamic anti-Semitism run deep. Mohammed never forgave
the Jews for rejecting his message. After he came to power, Jewish
tribes in the Arabian peninsula were converted by the sword, or
massacred. The Koran is rife with the Prophet’s disdain for Jews. (He
called them descendants of apes and pigs.) Alongside this are calls
to fight the Jews, who are indicted as the enemies of Allah.
Over the centuries, this theological anti-Semitism has evolved into
a conviction that Jews are the repositories of evil in the world and
Islam’s principal enemies.
It’s not surprising that the resurgence of widespread anti-Semitism
on the European continent, after years of quiescence, parallels the
influx of Middle East Muslims.
When Pope John Paul II paid a state visit to Syrian President Bashar
Al-Assad in 2001, he must have thought he’d stepped off the plane and
into a Nuremberg rally. In welcoming the pontiff, Assad proclaimed,
“They [the Jews] try to kill all the principles of divine faiths
with the same mentality of betraying Jesus Christ and torturing Him,
and in the same way that they tried to commit treachery against the
Prophet Mohammed.”
One who took the Prophet’s call to its logical conclusion was Hajj Amin
al-Husseini, grand mufti of Jerusalem before World War II. The mufti
spent the war years in Berlin as an honored guest of Adolf Hitler.
Working from his office in the capital of the Third Reich, al-Husseini
devoted himself to a Nazi victory, recruiting spies to serve in
the Middle East and raising a Bosnian Muslim division of the Waffen
SS. Described at Nuremberg as one of Eichmann’s best friends, the mufti
even visited Auschwitz and urged those who ran the gas chambers to
“work more diligently.”
In a radio broadcast from Berlin on November 2, 1943, Hitler’s partner
in genocide condemned the Jews in language that echoed Mein Kampf :
“The overwhelming egotism which lies in the character of Jews,
their unworthy belief that they are God’s chosen nation and their
assertion that all was created for them and that other people are
animals” is the reason “[t]hey cannot mix with any other nation but
live as parasites among the nations, suck out their blood, embezzle
their property, corrupt their morals…The divine anger and curse
that the Holy Koran mentions with reference to the Jews is because
of this unique character of the Jews.”
After the war, the mufti met a young Yassar Arafat in Cairo, and the
torch was passed to the next generation of Islamo-fascists. (Arafat
often referred to the Nazi henchman as “our hero al-Husseini.”)
In his book, The Myth of Hitler’s Pope, Rabbi David Dalin discloses,
“Arafat continued the mufti’s Nazi legacy by recruiting Nazis
and neo-Nazis for Fatah and the PLO. In 1969, for example, the PLO
recruited two former Nazi instructors, Erich Altern, a leader of the
Gestapo’s Jewish affairs section, and Willy Berner, an SS officer
in the Mauthausen extermination camp. Another former Nazi, Johann
Schuller, was found supplying arms to Fatah.”
There are unavoidable parallels between Nazis and Islamists. Both
adhere to totalitarian ideologies (though one is disguised as a
religion); each group trains its adherents to kill without compunction
and to show mercy to neither the young nor old; both nurse historical
grudges and long for a settling of accounts; and each see Jews as
the principal obstacle to the achievement of its utopian vision.
Of course, British Muslims are offended by Holocaust Memorials. While
Nazism was a European phenomenon, post-World War II Hitler wannabes
are found almost exclusively in the Arab and Muslim world. After the
fall of Berlin, the center of anti-Semitic agitation shifted to Cairo,
Damascus, Tehran, Riyadh, and Ramallah.
If the Blair government is really in an appeasement mode, it
could balance Holocaust Memorial Day – and lessen the awful sense
of alienation among Muslim youth – with a Hajj Amin al-Husseini
Appreciation Day.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress