Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Britain's history of 200-years of jihad

From Mellanie Phillips`s Diary:

"September 27, 2005

Britain's 200-year jihad
On my travels for the past few days, I have been reading a book which tells the story of a quite astonishing part of British history of which I was previously unaware. In 'White Gold', Giles Milton records the appalling details -- gleaned,it appears, from a wealth of historical documents including diaries and letters -- of a seaborne Islamic jihad against Britain which lasted for no less than two centuries.

From the early seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, thousands of British men women and children were kidnapped by Arab corsairs and sold into slavery in Morocco where they were kept in conditions of unspeakable barbarism. The astounding thing is that these British victims were not merely sized at sea where they ran the gauntlet of such pirates in places such as the Straits of Gibraltar. They were actually abducted from Britain itself.

Corsairs from a place in Morocco called Sale -- who became known in Britain as the ‘Sally Rovers’ -- sailed up the Cornish coast in July 1625, for example, came ashore dressed in djellabas and wielding damascene scimitars, burst into the parish church at Mount’s Bay and dragged out 60 men women and children whom they shipped off to Morocco. Thousands more Britons were seized from their villages or their ships and dispatched to the hell-holes of the Moroccan slave pens, from where they were forced to work all hours in appalling conditions building the vast palace of the monstrous and psychopathic Sultan, Moulay Ismail, who tortured and butchered them at whim. Most of them perished, but the book records the survival of a tenacious Cornish boy Thomas Pellow, who survived 23 years of this ordeal and whose descendant, Lord Exmouth, finally ended the white slave trade when he destroyed Algiers in 1816.

The book makes clear that this assault upon the British people (and upon Europeans and Americans who were similarly seized) was a jihad. The Sally Rovers, writes Milton, were called ‘al-ghuzat’-- the term once used for the soldiers who fought with the Prophet -- and were hailed as religious warriors engaged in a holy war against the infidel Christians who were pressurised to convert to Islam under threat of hideous punishment. What is even more striking was the response of the British crown. For almost two centuries, it made only the most ineffectual attempts to rescue its enslaved subjects. Those who had succumbed to the torture and inhumanity of the Sultan and converted to Islam were deemed to be no longer British and therefore outside the scope of any rescue. The pleas of Pellow’s parents were simply brushed aside. Popular outrage forced successive Kings to dispatch a series of feeble emissaries to try to get the Sultan to end this vile traffic and release the slaves, all to no avail.

But this went on for virtually two centuries. For almost 200 years the British state either sat on its hands or wrung them impotently while the Islamic jihad seized, enslaved and butchered its people. And then it appears, this staggering onslaught was all but airbrushed out of our history.

Food for disquieting thought."

Here`s the link.

Friday, September 23, 2005

The Zion Mule Corps, the Jewish Legion, and their Irish Commander, Colonel John Henry Patterson

The Jewish veteran-The Official Publication of the Jewish War Veterans of the USA
The Zion Mule Corps, the Jewish Legion, and their Irish Commander, Colonel John Henry Patterson

By Yanky Fachler

Season: Winter, Volume: 58, Number: 1



Born in 1867, John Henry Patterson was an Irish Protestant who drew spiritual inspiration from Old Testament warriors. After becoming an officer in the British army, specializing in railroad construction in India, he was sent to Africa in 1898 to construct a railroad bridge spanning the Tsavo River. When two man-eating lions mauled and mutilated over 100 Indian and African workers, Patterson shot the lions. His book, The Man Eaters of Tsavo, was described by President Teddy Roosevelt as “the most thrilling book of true stories ever written.”

After fighting with distinction in the Boer War, Patterson became embroiled in a sex scandal while leading a safari in Kenya, resigned from active duty, and reappeared on the eve of World War One in Alexandria, Egypt. Here he met two Russian Jews agitating for the formation of a Jewish Legion that would help the British kick the Turks out of Palestine. One was journalist Vladimir Evgenevich (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky. The other was Joseph Trumpeldor, the one-armed hero and veteran of the Japanese-Russian War. Four times awarded the St. George Order, the highest Russian military award for bravery, Trumpeldor became the first-ever Jewish officer in the Tsarist Army.

The Jewish Legion idea was turned down by the British commander. “Under the law I am not entitled to accept foreigners into the British army. I can offer you only one thing: to form a mule transport unit from your young people and send it to a different Turkish front.” Jabotinsky felt that this was an insult to the Jews, and refused. Trumpeldor saw little difference between trenches and transport, and agreed.

The officer appointed by the British to command the Jewish muleteers was John Henry Patterson. His second-in-command was Trumpeldor. In April 1915, the Assyrian Jewish Refugee Mule Corps (soon known as the Zion Mule Corps), sailed from Egypt to Gallipoli with several hundred men and 750 mules. They landed at V Beach on the Helles Peninsula in the midst of heavy fighting, and quickly distinguished themselves transporting water, ammunition, food, and other supplies to the front lines.

The Zion Mule Corps was deactivated in May 1916, but the British soon needed more manpower. In July 1917, Patterson was promoted to full Colonel, and began organizing the Jewish Legion. Acknowledging that he had been wrong about the Zion Mule Corps, Jabotinsky now accepted a commission as recruiting officer for the Jewish regiment.

Among the thousands of Legionnaires were 120 former muleteers, a large contingent of Russian Jews from London, and a mixture of foreign nationals from Allied and neutral nations. Eventually, 150 American Jewish volunteers joined the Jewish Legion, as well as a further 1,000 Palestinian Jews. Prominent Legionnaires included Israel’s first prime minister David Ben Gurion, and the father of another future premier, Yitzhak Rabin.

On 2 February 1918, the day before embarking for Egypt, the Jewish Legion marched through London’s Jewish quarter. The Jewish Chronicle reported: “...thousands of Jews and Jewesses marched merrily together with the ‘Judeans’ from the Tower whence the march began after they had been addressed by Colonel Patterson, who rode at the head of the picturesque Jewish troops.”

In June, the Legion was transferred to Palestine under the command of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force (EEF) commanded by General Sir Edmund Allenby, who was notoriously antagonistic towards Zionist aspirations. He was also opposed to the Balfour Declaration of November 1917, which promised the Jews a homeland in Palestine.

After successfully participating in the liberation of Damascus just before the end of the war, the Judean Regiment was pared down from three battalions to one. The remaining Legionnaires faced open discrimination from the British military authorities. Britain announced it was establishing a permanent army of occupation in Palestine, but turned down a large contingent of American Legionnaires who volunteered to serve in this force. By 1921, all that remained of the Jewish Legion was a mixed Arab-Jewish militia headed by former Legionnaire Eliezer Margolin. When anti-Jewish riots in Jaffa left 13 Jews dead, Margolin led armed Jewish militiamen into the city to protect the Jews. For this breach of discipline, he was forced to resign. This effectively marked the end of the Jewish Legion.

Patterson became highly critical of the anti-Semitic policies of the British authorities, describing these policies as “a foul stain on our fair name.” This prolific soldier/writer wrote two books about his experiences with his Jewish soldiers, With the Zionists at Gallipoli and With the Judeans in the Palestine Campaign. For the next three decades, Patterson’s dedication to the Zionist cause never wavered. He moved to the US, where he became a staunch supporter of Jabotinsky. In 1941, a year after Jabotinsky’s death, Patterson helped establish the Emergency Committee for an Army of Stateless and Palestinian Jews.

Chicago’s Field Museum has a permanent exhibit of Patterson’s man-eating lions. When Patterson lectured at the museum in 1924, the museum purchased the lions’ skins and skulls, and taxidermists created the life-like mounts that have been on public display for nearly 80 years. The largest repository of Patterson’s documents and personal effects are stored at the Jabotinsky Institute in Tel Aviv. In 1932, a group of American, Canadian and Argentinian former Legionnaires founded a moshav (agricultural settlement) called Avichayil (Father of the Army) near Netanya. Here they built Beit Hagdudim (Legions House), a museum dedicated to Patterson and the Jewish battalions of World War One.

Patterson’s Zion Mule Corps and the Jewish Legion helped lay the foundations for the Israel Defense Force 30 years later. Soldier, adventurer, writer and Christian Zionist, Colonel John Henry Patterson died in 1947, just a year before the establishment of the Zionist state that he had always supported.

2000 JWV. All rights reserved.

Here`s the link.

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Immigration taboos

"Thomas Sowell
August 16, 2005

Immigration has joined the long list of subjects on which it is taboo to talk sense in plain English. At the heart of much confusion about immigration is the notion that we "need" immigrants -- legal or illegal -- to do work that Americans won't do.

What we "need" depends on what it costs and what we are willing to pay. If I were a billionaire, I might "need" my own private jet. But I can remember a time when my family didn't even "need" electricity.

Leaving prices out of the picture is probably the source of more fallacies in economics than any other single misconception. At current wages for low-level jobs and current levels of welfare, there are indeed many jobs that Americans will not take.

The fact that immigrants -- and especially illegal immigrants -- will take those jobs is the very reason the wage levels will not rise enough to attract Americans.

This is not rocket science. It is elementary supply and demand. Yet we continue to hear about the "need" for immigrants to do jobs that Americans will not do -- even though these are all jobs that Americans have done for generations before mass illegal immigration became a way of life.

There is more to this issue than economics. The same mindless substitution of rhetoric for thinking that prevails on economic issues also prevails on other aspects of immigration.

Bombings in London, Madrid and the 9/11 terrorist attacks here are all part of the high price being paid today for decades of importing human time bombs from the Arab world. That in turn has been the fruit of an unwillingness to filter out people according to the countries they come from.

That squeamishness is still with us today, as shown by all the hand-wringing about "profiling" Middle Eastern airline passengers.

No doubt most Middle Eastern airline passengers are not carrying any weapons or any bombs -- and wouldn't be, even if there were no airport security to go through. But it is also true that most of the time you will not be harmed by playing Russian roulette.

Europeans and Americans have for decades been playing Russian roulette with their loose immigration policies. The intelligentsia have told us that it would be wrong, and even racist, to set limits based on where the immigrants come from.

There are thousands of Americans who might still be alive if we had banned immigration from Saudi Arabia -- and perhaps that might be more important than the rhetoric of the intelligentsia.

In that rhetoric, all differences between peoples are magically transformed into mere "stereotypes" and "perceptions."

This blithely ignores hard data showing, for example, that people who come here from some countries are ten times more likely to go on welfare as people from some other countries.

The media and the intelligentsia love to say that most immigrants, from whatever group, are good people. But what "most" people from a given country are like is irrelevant.

If 85 percent of group A are fine people and 95 percent of group B are fine people, that means you are going to be importing three times as many undesirables when you let in people from Group A.

Citizen-of-the-world types are resistant to the idea of tightening our borders, and especially resistant to the idea of making a distinction between people from different countries. But the real problem is not their self-righteous fetishes but the fact that they have intimidated so many other people into silence.

In the current climate of political correctness it is taboo even to mention facts that go against the rosy picture of immigrants -- for example, the fact that Russia and Nigeria are always listed among the most corrupt countries on earth, and that Russian and Nigerian immigrants in the United States have already established patterns of crime well known to law enforcement but kept from the public by the mainstream media.

Self-preservation used to be called the first law of nature. But today self-preservation has been superseded by a need to preserve the prevailing rhetoric and visions. Immigration is just one of the things we can no longer discuss rationally as a result."

Here`s the link to Thomas Sowell`s Townhall.com piece.

Friday, September 09, 2005

Ha’aretz Fuels Anti-Israel Bias

"August 6, 2001 by Andrea Levin

Ha’aretz Fuels Anti-Israel Bias



In a familiar syndrome, many otherwise impartial American journalists newly posted in Israel slip quickly in their reporting into unmistakably hostile views of the country. Why?

One factor is their sources in the Israeli media. As Eric Weiner, former Jerusalem bureau chief for National Public Radio, told a Palestinian media symposium, every working day began with scanning local papers for stories. He relied especially on what he termed the “very respectable [Israeli] newspaper” Ha’aretz. Like NPR, countless other media cite Ha’aretz writers regularly, while a global audience reads the paper’s English Internet edition online.

Although Ha’aretz bills itself as “an independent newspaper with a broadly liberal outlook,” many of the opinion writers and some reporters espouse views of the extreme far left, and factual accuracy is often sacrificed to their political predilections. Reporter Amira Hass, for example, has just been ordered by the Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court to pay $60,000 in damages to the Jewish community of Hebron for her false and incendiary report that Jewish residents there had abused the corpse of a dead Arab shot by Israeli Border police in a violent incident. The allegations were disproved by multiple televised accounts of the event.

The same reporter’s stories, replete with distorted and inaccurate charges that Israel is an “apartheid” state, steals Palestinian water, callously targets Palestinians over the age of 12 with sniper-fire, and generally subjugates Arabs out of sheer viciousness, are posted on countless anti-Israel websites. So also is the commentary of a score of other Ha’aretz writers (Gideon Samet, Gideon Levy, Akiva Eldar, Baruch Kimmerling, Ze’ev Sternhell, Joseph Algazy, Danny Rubenstein, Moshe Reinfeld and many more), in the company of other favorites of such websites like Noam Chomsky, Hanan Ashrawi and Edward Said (eg: cesr, pmwatch, globalsolidarity, liberate-palestine).

Indeed, a look at such sites and the content of the Ha’aretz articles posted suggests that Ha’aretz writers are in the vanguard of those making the Palestinian case against Israel.

Hass and the extreme among her colleagues are also eagerly quoted by the most virulent anti-Israel commentators in the American media. The Orlando Sentinel’s Charley Reese, a syndicated writer obsessed with supposed Israeli iniquity praises Hass for writing “poignantly of this practice [of targeting Palestinians over 12 with sniper-fire] in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz.”

A ferociously anti-Israel writer at Connecticut’s Hartford Courant, Amy Pagnozzi, warmly endorses the observations of veteran Israel-basher Robert Fisk from Britain’s Independent newspaper, who said: “In particular, coverage in the Israel newspaper Ha’aretz ‘outshines anything’ reported in the States...The Israeli paper’s Gaza correspondent, Amira Hass, recently reported on an Israeli Defense Forces sniper whose orders were to shoot anyone over 12 as fair game.”

In addition to the Reeses, Pagnozzis and Fisks who seize on the strident anti-Israel voices at Ha’aretz, more mainstream American reporters and commentators routinely reflect the less radical but still harsh views of others at the paper (as well as carrying at times the views of less ideologically driven and more factually accurate Ha’aretz reporters). These, for instance, are a few of the Ha’aretz observations conveyed to millions of Americans.

Danny Rubenstein told National Public Radio listeners in October 2000 that Jews do not value the land of Israel the way Arabs do, since Jews are urban dwellers. He blamed Israel for not having dismantled “even one settlement since the Oslo agreement” – as though Oslo had stipulated such measures.

Rubenstein is the same journalist who reported as fact, and without including the IDF’s vehement refutation of the lie, that Israel was using poison gas against Palestinians (Ha’aretz February 15, 2001).

Doron Rosenblum, another favorite with the American mainstream media, often provides ridicule of Israeli leaders. An Associated Press story quoted a December 2000 Rosenblum observation that prominent Israeli figures Ariel Sharon, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak and Benjamin Netanyahu are, “a bunch of junk satellites that continue to orbit the earth even after their mission is over – an eternal beehive of has-beens and schemers...”

Akiva Eldar too, despite a record of factual sloppiness and twisted interpretation, is often cited. A May 23, 2001 New York Times story quoted him declaring that Ariel Sharon’s “shelling of Jibril Rajoub’s house removes any remaining doubts. Ariel Sharon has decided to turn the Palestinian Authority into the enemy.” Thus eight months into an unprecedented mini-war launched by Arafat’s PA, Eldar points the finger at Sharon.

Like many of his colleagues, Eldar joins the outside world continuously in wagging his finger at the Jews. A Washington Post story (July 21, 2000) quoted him saying that Israeli public opinion against the division of Jerusalem is indicative that, “there is something about Jerusalem that addles the brain.”

Another Israeli journalist based at a different newspaper, Yediot Ahronot's Nahum Barnea, wrote in November 2000 in a publication of The Israel Democracy Institute that there are Israeli reporters who do not pass the “lynch test.” These are journalists who could not bring themselves to criticize the Palestinians even when two Israelis were savagely murdered by a Palestinian mob in Ramallah. Which journalists? Gideon Levy, Amira Hass and Akiva Eldar of Ha’aretz. Barnea wrote: “And then the lynch test came, and before it the test of the shooting and fire bombs of the Tanzim fighters, and before it the test of the violations of the Oslo Agreement by Arafat, and it turns out that the support of some of the prominent reporters [for Palestinian positions] is absolute. ...They have a mission.”

The ultimate political effects of prestigious Israeli media disseminating continuous and often inflammatory anti-Israel misinformation in English in the era of the Internet should not be underestimated.




Copyright © 2001 by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. All rights reserved. This column may be reprinted without prior permission."

Here`s the link.