NUKE MECCA AND DESTROY ISLAM

NUKE MECCA AND DESTROY ISLAM

The Case for Nuking Mecca

In this post I make the case that nuking Mecca would be a rational deterrent

to radical Islamists bent on using WMD against American civilians. However,

even if there is no deterrent effect, attacking Mecca and wiping out the

central locus of Islamic ritual worship may be in the long-term interests of

the US and Occidental world.

Mecca is not Damascus. It plays a central role in Muslim worship. Five

times a day Muslims pray toward it. All Muslims who have the means are

expected to make the Hajj--a pilgrimage to Mecca which revolves around the

Kaaba stone. The Kaaba stone is really the reason Mecca is considered holy.

Muslims believe the site was used for worship as far back as Adam and that

the shrine around the stone was first placed there by Abraham (Ibrahim).

There is a 12 mile zone around the stone that infidels are restricted from

entering. It's that holy. No non-Muslims near it. In fact, without Mecca and

the Kaaba stone, Islam would be very different.

Mecca, then, is quite unlike any other place in the world for Muslims. It is

an entire city dedicated to Muslim worship. A place set apart. A holy place.

It is an entire city that is thought to be the Temple of God.

Islamist terrorists also consider Mecca the holiest place in the world. It

is central to their mode of worship. They face it when they pray. They too

believe they must make the hajj. If we take them at their word, then the

reason they commit terrorist acts is because they take their religious

convictions so seriously. When they kill us, it is because they believe that

this is what their God wants them to do.

So, ask yourself the question again: Can terrorists be deterred from using

WMD against American targets?

Maybe they can. If Islamic extremists really love their religious

institutions in the way that they claim they do, then pointing an ICBM at

Mecca may not be the most irrational thing to do. They may not care if the

rest of the world goes up in a nuclear mushroom cloud, as Bill points out,

but Mecca is not the rest of the world. Would they really risk blowing up

New York City if they believed the consequences of such an action would be a

30 kiloton nuclear explosion over the Kaaba stone? After all, the nuclear

destruction of Mecca would end Islamic forms of worship as they presently

exist.

If I might misquote Sting for a moment, "Is it such a crazy thing to do, if

the Terrorists love their Mecca too?"

I have already made the case that Mecca is central to Islamic forms of

worship. Mecca, I have argued, is a Temple City. Although many Muslim

theologians will deny that any place is holy in Islam, there is at least a

de facto holiness ascribed to the area surrounding the Kaaba stone. In many

ways the city of Mecca is central to Islam in just the same way that the

Temple of Solomon was central to ancient Judaism. It is this similarity

which is so striking, and why the destruction of Mecca might do to Islam

what the final destruction of Herod's Temple in Jerusalem did to Judaism.

While the bloody events surrounding Rome's sacking of Jerusalem are indeed

disgusting and tragic, that event forced Jews to rethink their relationship

with God. More importantly, that event forced Jews to rethink their

relationship with their fellowman.

Without wishing to reduce all of Jewish history or life to one paragraph,

and thus leaving out the many facets of ancient Hebrew worship, let me go

ahead an do that anyway (with many apologies up front--and welcoming any

corrections or differing opinions). Ancient Judaism had a legal structure

which was similar to Islamic sharia in that they both unify the religious

codes thought to be handed down by God with secular authority. In fact, the

Old Testament laws seem just as draconian as any I would find in sharia.

There is just something about stoning adulteresses that I kind find of

harsh, that's all. I know such applications of Mosaic law were probably

rare, but Muslims would argue the same thing about the strict application of

sharia law in the ideal Islamic state.

Ancient Judaism also had another commonality with Islam: worship was

centered on a holy place of ritualistic practice. After the destruction of

the Temple, though, Jews had to ask new questions about the meaning of being

holy. Stateless, they found that strict religious codes of conduct could not

be enforced in the same way as before. While the Jewish Diaspora had already

begun the process of transforming Judaism, the final destruction of Temple

centered worship forced this transformation on a broader scale.

Jews found that God no longer had a place to reside in. Jews found that they

could no longer perform the rituals required by God to be purified. Jews

found that they could no longer enforce God's law. Jews found that their

specialness was different than they had previously supposed. Worship

changed. Everything changed.

What I propose is simply this. Would destroying Mecca begin a similar

process for Muslims? Perhaps only the threat of destroying Mecca would be

enough.

Radical Muslims believe they are in a race to bring about the world wide

Caliphate. They believe that Muslims are destined to rule the world. What I

propose is simple: show them that they cannot rule the world. Show them that

Allah is not on their side--at least, not in the way that they believe.

Osama bin Laden once famously said that people will choose the strong horse

over the weak horse. What if Islam is shown to be the weak horse? What if

one of the central tenants of Muslim worship, the hajj, was gone? Would this

not force some serious rethinking in the Islamic world?

Today we are told by Muslims that the true meaning of jihad is internal

struggle. Unfortunately, the actions of too many Muslims shows that they

believe jihad means armed struggle against the infidels. Destroying Mecca

may have the long-term affect of convincing radical Muslims that Allah

really doesn't want sharia law around the world. That all that stuff about

killing the infidels in the Quran--that's all metaphor.

After all, if Muslims can be convinced that the whole hajj thing is just

metaphor, then what else might they consider as metaphorical? Perhaps jihad.

Perhaps sharia. Perhaps the global Caliphate.

Tiptoeing around Our Problems

By Dr. William Pierce

"We've been talking about the very dangerous situation in the Middle

East recently, just because so much is happening there, and

undoubtedly we'll be talking about it much more in the future. For

that reason I want to make very clear what my motives and sympathies

are, lest I lead anyone astray and be thought a hypocrite for doing

so. First, regarding Palestine: although my sympathies definitely lie

with the Palestinians rather than with the Jews, it is not horror at

what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians that motivates me. What

motivates me is horror that my country is being used by the Jews in

their war against the Palestinians. If America were not involved at

all in the Middle East I still would sympathize with the Palestinians

and I would wish that they could be successful in driving the Jews

into the sea and annihilating the abomination that is Israel, but that

conflict between Jews and Palestinians would not be a major concern

for me. At least, my

concern there would be dwarfed by my concern for problems more

directly involving my own people in America and in Europe and in

southern Africa.

Even now, with money and weapons being supplied by America and used to

slaughter Palestinians, my concern is much less with monsters like

Ariel Sharon who are doing the slaughtering than it is with the filthy

creatures among my own people in America who are collaborating with

Jews here to keep the weapons and money flowing to Sharon -- and are

ready to do whatever else the Jews require of them here or abroad.

So when I tell you about Jews in occupied Palestine shooting

Palestinian children, and disapproval and anger are evident in my

voice, what I really am angry about is that the American people, my

people, are being used for this murderous activity. I am angry that

America's whole foreign policy has been perverted to serve Jewish

interests at the expense of American interests. I am angry that

America's political system has been perverted to ensure that we always

have so-called "leaders," whether Democrat or Republican, who are

dependent on the Jewish media or Jewish money or both for their

election and consequently will do the bidding of the Jews. I am angry

that our whole government is riddled with Jews -- Jews in our Defense

Department, Jews in our State

Department, Jews in our Immigration and Naturalization Service, Jews

in our Justice Department, Jews in the President's speech-writing

staff - who really set the policies of our government behind the

scenes, while the politicians are out front in the spotlight making

speeches and kissing babies - and doing as they're told by the Jews

behind the

scenes.

Did you know that it was a Jewish speechwriter, David Frum, who put

the phrase "axis of evil" in George Bush's mouth to justify America's

ongoing war against Israel's enemies? Did you know that a clique of

Jews in the Defense Department and among George Bush's foreign policy

advisers are the people actually running the so-called "war on terror"

in Afghanistan: a war that they intend to expand to Iraq and any other

Middle Eastern country that gets uppity, in order to make that part of

the world safe for Israel at American expense? Secretary of Defense

Donald Rumsfeld is a front man for his nominal subordinates, Deputy

Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Deputy Undersecretary of

Defense for Policy Douglas Feith; and George Bush's official foreign

policy adviser, Condoleezza Rice, helps him meet his Black quota for

the Cabinet, but it is the Jew Richard Perle, chairman of Bush's

Defense Policy Board, who gives him his foreign policy directives.

As I've said on more than one occasion, George Bush is a feckless

nincompoop who couldn't come up with a defense policy or a foreign

policy on his own if he had to -- which is why he's President. The

real policymakers behind the scenes certainly don't want a man in the

White House who has ideas of his own, because those ideas might

conflict with theirs.

And it is nothing but empty sophistry to make a distinction between

Jews in Israel, such as Ariel Sharon and Simon Peres, and the Jews in

Mr. Bush's administration formulating his policies or the Jews

controlling our mass media. They all are Jews, and that's what really

matters.

There are many knowledgeable Americans besides me who think that it's

not a good thing to have Jews using America to advance Israel's

interests at the expense of America's interests. They know how the

system works: how the Jews exert their control through money and media

and a well-entrenched network of Jewish operatives, such as Wolfowitz

and Feith and Perle. And many of these knowledgeable Americans also

understand how Jewish subterfuge and deceit work: they understand that

the Jews throw up a lot of smoke to conceal their control and make it

appear that they have much less influence than they actually do.

Despite this degree of understanding that many knowledgeable Americans

have, there seem to be very few who are willing or able to draw the

necessary conclusions. What I keep seeing are comments about the need

to get the so-called "peace process" going again in the Middle East,

and how there are hardline supporters of Israel who are obstructing

the "peace process" because they think that it will give too much to

the Palestinians or will compromise Israel's security, or whatever.

These knowledgeable Americans seem to believe that if we could just

get around the Jewish hardliners somehow -- if we could just

neutralize Jews such as Wolfowitz and Feith and Perle; if Ariel Sharon

could be replaced by a "moderate" Jewish prime minister -- then the

"peace process" could proceed, America could gradually reduce its

involvement in helping the Jews keep the Palestinians repressed, and

eventually Israel no longer would be using America, and everything

would be rosy. And so these knowledgeable Americans expend all of

their wit and energy in these trivial pursuits.

Listen! Do you know what the most hopeful aspect of the conflict

between Jews and Palestinians is now? It is the ongoing radicalization

of the Muslim masses throughout the whole Middle East. The

collaborator governments in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Saudi Arabia are

terrified of the reaction they see among their own people to what

Ariel Sharon is doing to the Palestinians. When Sharon's Jewish troops

shoot Palestinian children, Muslim mobs riot, and governments that now

collaborate with the United States quake. Ariel Sharon is the best

thing that has happened in the Middle East in the last 54 years.

The Palestinian tactic of suicide bombing is being denounced by every

politician and every media spokesman over here now. It's nothing but

terrorism, they all say. There's no justification at all for suicide

bombing, they tell us. Of course, whenever you hear that sort of

unanimity from the politicians and the media people you should be

suspicious. In fact, suicide bombing is the best tactic for the

Palestinians to use now, because it provokes the Jews to step up

reprisals. And the reprisals radicalize the masses in every country in

the Middle East. If just one of the collaborator governments falls,

the spines of all the rest will be stiffened, and the Bush government

will be far less likely to find collaborators for building its

so-called "coalition" to do the will of the Jews in the Middle East.

Suicide bombers now hardly put a dent in the population of five

million Jews in occupied Palestine, and Sharon's bloody reprisals

hardly put a dent in the overall Palestinian population. But if

conflict of this sort continues until just one collaborator government

is overthrown, that ultimately will be worth more than ten thousand

successful suicide

bombings in which only 20 or so Jews are killed each time. In the long

run there can be no real peace in the Middle East and no end to

America's shameful role there -- and no future for the Palestinian

people -- as long as there is an Israel. There seems to be a better

understanding of these things among knowledgeable Palestinians than

among knowledgeable Americans.

Shallow thinking and the pursuit of trivial goals is even worse among

knowledgeable Americans when it comes to domestic problems. They

really do not want to grasp these problems with both hands and deal

with them in a forthright way. Look, for example, at what uncontrolled

immigration has done and is doing to America. And what do

knowledgeable Americans propose to do about that? Very little, really.

They make much of the fact that several of the al-Qaeda hijackers who

carried out the September 11 attack were in the United States only

because of very lax immigration policies, and so that's a good reason

for tightening up the policies.

How about simply rounding up all illegal aliens immediately -- all 12

million of them -- and booting them and all of their offspring out of

the country without further ado?

Oh, no, no, no! We can't do that! Why not? Well, the media never would

stand for it. The media would be all over anyone who even proposed a

mass expulsion of illegal aliens. They would denounce any political

leader who tried to do that as a "racist" and a "neo-Nazi." And so

knowledgeable Americans, who understand the immigration disaster quite

well, continue tiptoeing around it, afraid to do or even say anything

really significant about it: terrified even to think about really

radical solutions that might actually end the problem. And it's the

same with the rest of our domestic problems. Lots of people understand

these problems and are worried about them, but they won't tackle them

in any

significant way. They let the Jews -- the Jewish media and Jewish

money and the entrenched Jewish network -- have their way, for all

practical purposes.

Why? Why are the Jews permitted to get away with all of their

destructive policies and activities without being challenged or

opposed in any significant way? Part of the reason is that the Jews

are very powerful, and therefore many people are afraid to cross them.

They're afraid of the sort of media reaction I just mentioned in

connection with immigration. Everyone understands that the Jews stick

together and will viciously attack anyone who opposes them. It's the

old story, so aptly expressed by the late-16th-century writer, Sir

John Harington. Harington wrote: "Treason doth never prosper: what's

the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." Today the

Jewish power structure is

prospering, and none dare oppose it or even call it what it is. Well,

that's only part of the reason Jews are permitted to get away with so

much. There's more to it than that. There's a mystique the Jews have

built very carefully around themselves and nurtured diligently. It is

a mystique of piety and injured innocence. It is a mystique that says

to the Gentile world: "We are a gentle and inoffensive race, and

because of this everyone hates us. We're smart and we work hard and

achieve success, and because of this everyone hates us. We are a

highly moral and ethical race, and because of this everyone hates us.

We are a very talented race, with many gifted members, many geniuses,

and because of this everyone hates us. We are a very altruistic race,

a race of philanthropists who only want to make a better world for

everyone, and because of this everyone hates us."

Many simpletons among the lemmings simply accept these claims at face

value. Many knowledgeable people, however, who can see through these

claims to the real Jews hiding behind them, still hesitate to

challenge them. Part of the Jewish mystique is the so-called

"Holocaust." In its most simpleminded form the "Holocaust" story is

the claim that the

Germans hated the Jews for the reasons I just mentioned -- for their

gentleness and their success and their morality and their talent and

their altruism -- and because of this hatred roasted six million of

them during the Second World War in "gas ovens," to use one of the

Jews' favorite "Holocaust" phrases.

Actually, the "Holocaust" is a very powerful part of the Jewish

mystique. The Jews crafted the "Holocaust" story with great care and

great effort -- well, actually not with as much care as they might

have used: it's as full of holes as a Swiss cheese, but still it is

sufficient to make most people, even those who understand what Jews

are really like, hesitate to attack them. People don't want to be seen

as bullies. They don't want to be seen as so insensitive that they

would criticize the Jews, who already have suffered so much, poor

dears, at the hands of anti-Semites.

In several past broadcasts we've looked at a number of the lies and

exaggerations and distortions that make up the "Holocaust" story.

There are a number of good books available on the subject from the

sponsor of this broadcast, National Vanguard Books, including Norman

Finklestein's excellent book The Holocaust Industry, which I discussed

in an earlier broadcast. The point is that despite the lies, despite

the fact that many knowledgeable Americans are aware of the lies, the

"Holocaust" still serves its purpose for the Jews. People are afraid

of the image conjured up by the "Holocaust."

Perhaps it's that American life is too soft... Whatever the reason,

many otherwise knowledgeable and hardheaded Americans just can't

entertain the idea of rounding up the Jews and getting rid of them,

even when the situation is as urgent as it is in America today. And

really, in the long run that is the only way to solve the Jewish

problem.

The Germans understood that, back in the 1930s, and they had the

courage and the foresight to act on their understanding. Unlike

Americans today, they had an honest government concerned above all

with the survival, welfare, and progress of the German people, and

they began doing what was necessary, forcing the Jews to emigrate

wholesale from Germany beginning in 1933. And because of that the

Jewish propaganda machine has attacked the Germans so viciously, has

so blackened and demonized their image, that today even knowledgeable

people are afraid to be associated with that image. They are afraid to

say that the Germans were right, that the Germans were justified, and

that we need to do the same if we are to survive. So, as I said, the

"Holocaust" story, despite its

glaring discrepancies and lies, still serves as a shield for the Jews;

it still protects them from criticism.

Well, mostly. In parts of Europe not quite as poisoned by Jewish

propaganda as America is, the shield has slipped a bit. A large

British department store chain, Selfridges, has yielded to demands

from anti-Israel demonstrators and has removed from its shelves

products marked "Made in Israel." Last week the second largest

supermarket chain in Norway, Coop Norge -- which is to say, Norway

Coop, announced its decision to boycott all Israeli imports. That

decision was not the result of pressure from anti-Israel demonstrators

but was based on the feeling by Coop Norge management that it would be

immoral to continue supporting the Israeli economy by selling Israeli

imports under the

present circumstances. That is a step forward, though it is a long way

from what is needed.

The Jews, of course, immediately began waving their "Holocaust" story

around, and now, as the boycott movement catches hold in Scandinavia,

they are trying to portray themselves as injured innocents being

attacked once more by "anti-Semites." They are comparing the growing

Scandinavian boycott of Israeli products to the German boycott of

Jewish merchants in the late 1930s. Certainly, a boycott of Israeli

products is a good thing, and the fact that such a boycott is even

thinkable by big businessmen today is a sign that the Jewish mystique

-- and in particular the Jewish "Holocaust" story -- is becoming a bit

shopworn. It no longer has the hypnotic power that it once had -- at

least, in some parts of the world. And I suppose that we should be

happy about that. The unfortunate fact remains, however, that in

America the Jews still have their money and

their media and their entrenched network of bureaucrats, and even if

the "Holocaust" story has lost some of its charm in Europe, it still

keeps most knowledgeable Americans intimidated.

Knowledge isn't enough. Courage and boldness also are necessary.

Honesty and forthrightness are necessary also. Tiptoeing around the

critical issues of our time isn't enough. Tiny reforms in our

disastrous foreign policy and in our disastrous immigration policy and

in a dozen other disastrous policies aren't enough. We need to stop

apologizing to the people who are destroying us and go full bore at

destroying them instead.

Instead of being hypnotized by the "Holocaust" story we need to look

with clear eyes at why there was a need for action against the Jews in

Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. The Jews' claim today that the Germans

were suffering from collective insanity and had no reason for trying

to get the Jews off their backs is as phony as George Bush's claim

that

Osama bin Laden had no reason for attacking America on September 11.

Wherever Jews go they corrupt and destroy. That is their nature,

always and everywhere. Let us be thankful to the Palestinians who now

are making such terrible sacrifices to help the world see what the

Jews are like. And I suppose we also should be thankful to Ariel

Sharon for demonstrating so forthrightly to the world what Jews are

like.

Let us hope that the conflict between Jews and Palestinians

intensifies and lasts long enough to wake up many more of our people

around the world and fill them with disgust at America's continuing

support for the Jews. Let us hope that it lasts long enough to bring

about the overthrow of every collaborationist regime in the Muslim

world. Let us hope that it brings about an airtight oil embargo

against the United States and shuts off the lights in every shopping

mall and every sports stadium in America long enough for the lemmings

to become restless and begin asking questions. Let us hope that it

makes the efforts of every fool and every traitor who is striving for

a resumption of the so-called "peace process" so obviously futile that

these efforts no longer have the power to deceive anyone.

Ultimately, of course, we must not depend on the Palestinian suicide

bombers or on Ariel Sharon's murder squads to do for us what we should

be doing for ourselves. Ultimately we must stop tiptoeing and begin

marching boldly and forthrightly toward solving our own problems."

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/

That would cause a total all-out jihad! That is exactly what we NEED to

solve this Muslim problem once and for all. They all MUST die and go on to

their 72 virgins as soon as possible!

Many good people will also die in the process but since they cannot police

their own and get rid of the troublemakers they must all die!

CHILDREN OF ISLAM! THIS IS YOUR WARNING! CLEAN UP YOUR ACT OR WE MIGHT DO

IT FOR YOU!

"Ghamph" <ghamph@localnet.com> wrote in message

news:134k1thdqppq325@corp.supernews.com...

> NUKE MECCA AND DESTROY ISLAM

>

> The Case for Nuking Mecca

>

> In this post I make the case that nuking Mecca would be a rational

> deterrent

> to radical Islamists bent on using WMD against American civilians.

> However,

> even if there is no deterrent effect, attacking Mecca and wiping out the

> central locus of Islamic ritual worship may be in the long-term interests

> of

> the US and Occidental world.

> Mecca is not Damascus. It plays a central role in Muslim worship. Five

> times a day Muslims pray toward it. All Muslims who have the means are

> expected to make the Hajj--a pilgrimage to Mecca which revolves around the

> Kaaba stone. The Kaaba stone is really the reason Mecca is considered

> holy.

> Muslims believe the site was used for worship as far back as Adam and that

> the shrine around the stone was first placed there by Abraham (Ibrahim).

> There is a 12 mile zone around the stone that infidels are restricted from

> entering. It's that holy. No non-Muslims near it. In fact, without Mecca

> and

> the Kaaba stone, Islam would be very different.

>

> Mecca, then, is quite unlike any other place in the world for Muslims. It

> is

> an entire city dedicated to Muslim worship. A place set apart. A holy

> place.

> It is an entire city that is thought to be the Temple of God.

>

> Islamist terrorists also consider Mecca the holiest place in the world. It

> is central to their mode of worship. They face it when they pray. They too

> believe they must make the hajj. If we take them at their word, then the

> reason they commit terrorist acts is because they take their religious

> convictions so seriously. When they kill us, it is because they believe

> that

> this is what their God wants them to do.

>

> So, ask yourself the question again: Can terrorists be deterred from using

> WMD against American targets?

>

> Maybe they can. If Islamic extremists really love their religious

> institutions in the way that they claim they do, then pointing an ICBM at

> Mecca may not be the most irrational thing to do. They may not care if the

> rest of the world goes up in a nuclear mushroom cloud, as Bill points out,

> but Mecca is not the rest of the world. Would they really risk blowing up

> New York City if they believed the consequences of such an action would be

> a

> 30 kiloton nuclear explosion over the Kaaba stone? After all, the nuclear

> destruction of Mecca would end Islamic forms of worship as they presently

> exist.

>

> If I might misquote Sting for a moment, "Is it such a crazy thing to do,

> if

> the Terrorists love their Mecca too?"

>

> I have already made the case that Mecca is central to Islamic forms of

> worship. Mecca, I have argued, is a Temple City. Although many Muslim

> theologians will deny that any place is holy in Islam, there is at least a

> de facto holiness ascribed to the area surrounding the Kaaba stone. In

> many

> ways the city of Mecca is central to Islam in just the same way that the

> Temple of Solomon was central to ancient Judaism. It is this similarity

> which is so striking, and why the destruction of Mecca might do to Islam

> what the final destruction of Herod's Temple in Jerusalem did to Judaism.

> While the bloody events surrounding Rome's sacking of Jerusalem are indeed

> disgusting and tragic, that event forced Jews to rethink their

> relationship

> with God. More importantly, that event forced Jews to rethink their

> relationship with their fellowman.

>

> Without wishing to reduce all of Jewish history or life to one paragraph,

> and thus leaving out the many facets of ancient Hebrew worship, let me go

> ahead an do that anyway (with many apologies up front--and welcoming any

> corrections or differing opinions). Ancient Judaism had a legal structure

> which was similar to Islamic sharia in that they both unify the religious

> codes thought to be handed down by God with secular authority. In fact,

> the

> Old Testament laws seem just as draconian as any I would find in sharia.

> There is just something about stoning adulteresses that I kind find of

> harsh, that's all. I know such applications of Mosaic law were probably

> rare, but Muslims would argue the same thing about the strict application

> of

> sharia law in the ideal Islamic state.

>

> Ancient Judaism also had another commonality with Islam: worship was

> centered on a holy place of ritualistic practice. After the destruction of

> the Temple, though, Jews had to ask new questions about the meaning of

> being

> holy. Stateless, they found that strict religious codes of conduct could

> not

> be enforced in the same way as before. While the Jewish Diaspora had

> already

> begun the process of transforming Judaism, the final destruction of Temple

> centered worship forced this transformation on a broader scale.

>

> Jews found that God no longer had a place to reside in. Jews found that

> they

> could no longer perform the rituals required by God to be purified. Jews

> found that they could no longer enforce God's law. Jews found that their

> specialness was different than they had previously supposed. Worship

> changed. Everything changed.

>

> What I propose is simply this. Would destroying Mecca begin a similar

> process for Muslims? Perhaps only the threat of destroying Mecca would be

> enough.

>

> Radical Muslims believe they are in a race to bring about the world wide

> Caliphate. They believe that Muslims are destined to rule the world. What

> I

> propose is simple: show them that they cannot rule the world. Show them

> that

> Allah is not on their side--at least, not in the way that they believe.

>

> Osama bin Laden once famously said that people will choose the strong

> horse

> over the weak horse. What if Islam is shown to be the weak horse? What if

> one of the central tenants of Muslim worship, the hajj, was gone? Would

> this

> not force some serious rethinking in the Islamic world?

>

> Today we are told by Muslims that the true meaning of jihad is internal

> struggle. Unfortunately, the actions of too many Muslims shows that they

> believe jihad means armed struggle against the infidels. Destroying Mecca

> may have the long-term affect of convincing radical Muslims that Allah

> really doesn't want sharia law around the world. That all that stuff about

> killing the infidels in the Quran--that's all metaphor.

>

> After all, if Muslims can be convinced that the whole hajj thing is just

> metaphor, then what else might they consider as metaphorical? Perhaps

> jihad.

> Perhaps sharia. Perhaps the global Caliphate.

>

>

>

>

The Value of Truth and Righteousness

By Dr. William Pierce

Last Saturday George Bush addressed the United Nations General

Assembly, urging all of the member nations to join the United States

in bringing pressure to bear against all countries that sponsor

terrorism or harbor terrorists. He did it in his standard mock-serious

way, barely suppressing a smirk. Everyone applauded, including the

representative of a country that from its founding until the present

day has sponsored

terrorism. That country, of course, is Israel.

The prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, is a war criminal, a mass

murderer, with the blood of thousands of women and children on his

hands. He is being sought now for trial by the same Hague Tribunal

that succeeded in extraditing former Yugoslav President Slobodan

Milosevic for trial on charges of crimes against humanity in Kosovo,

the same

Hague Tribunal that already has tried and sentenced soldiers who raped

and murdered in Bosnia and in Rwanda.

In 1982, during Israel's invasion of Lebanon, Ariel Sharon was

Israel's defense minister. After the bloody terror-bombing of civilian

neighborhoods in Beirut that killed thousands of Lebanese and

Palestinian civilians -- terror bombing carried out by Jews flying

military aircraft supplied to Israel by the United States - Sharon

arranged for the evacuation of Palestinian fighters from Lebanon.

Palestinian women, children, and old people were left behind in

refugee camps, with their safety guaranteed by the United States. On

the night of September 16, 1982, Sharon sent murder squads into two

Palestinian refugee camps, Sabra and Chatila, in West Beirut to kill

the unarmed

Palestinian civilians in the camps. With Israeli tanks and troops

surrounding the camps to prevent any of the Palestinians from

escaping, Sharon's murder squads shot, knifed, and bludgeoned

Palestinian civilians all that night and the next day and the

following night, while the Israelis around the camps listened

gleefully to the shots and screams coming from inside. Then Sharon

sent in bulldozers to scoop out mass burial pits and cover up the

corpses of more than 2,000 Palestinian women and children.

Many Palestinians remained unburied, however, and Red Cross workers

found whole families in their homes with their throats cut and other

families who had been lined up and machine-gunned, from small children

to elderly grandparents. One infant had been stomped to death by a man

wearing spiked boots.

This was Ariel Sharon's work, but only a part of his work. He is a man

who believes the teaching of the Talmud that only Jews are human

beings, and that all who are not Jews were put on this earth only to

serve the Jews, and that anyone who opposes the Jews deserves to be

killed, and he has acted in accord with this belief all his life.

There are a dozen major atrocities for which he could be tried by the

Hague Tribunal, but the one with which he is charged now is the mass

murder he implemented, as Israel's defense minister, in West Beirut in

September 1982. And the U.S. government, which clamored for Slobodan

Milosevic to be turned over to the Hague Tribunal for trial, pretends

that it knows nothing about Sharon's genocidal crimes against

humanity.

In the 1950s Israel's Mossad, the equivalent of the CIA in the United

States, sent hundreds of letter bombs to German scientists working in

Egypt and Syria, killing a number of them.

In 1967, during Israel's war against Egypt, the Israeli army carried

out a number of mass executions of Egyptian prisoners of war in the

Sinai, forcing them to dig ditches, then lining them up and shooting

them. Dozens of eyewitnesses to these mass executions have reported

what they saw, but the world's politicians and media bosses pretend

not to know.

Also in 1967 Israel attacked the U.S. Navy ship, the U.S.S. Liberty,

attempting to sink it and kill its crew and then blame the sinking on

the Egyptians.

Israeli agents have carried out assassinations and other terrorist

operations around the world. One of the most colorful of these

operations -- and one of the few that received major media coverage -

was the attempt to murder a prominent Muslim cleric in Jordan in 1997.

Two Israeli agents sprayed poison in the ear of Khaled Meshal as they

walked past him on a sidewalk in Amman. Fortunately, Meshal's

bodyguards were able to catch the two Jews as they ran away, and so

the assassination attempt was publicized.

Israel has stolen nuclear materials and nuclear weapons technology

from the United States to build an illegal nuclear arsenal. Israel

also is known to have developed an arsenal of biological and chemical

weapons of mass destruction.

None of these Israeli activities is secret. Those I've mentioned are

just a few of the ones that were found out and publicized. Not

publicized very much, of course. In fact, they all were dropped from

the news pretty quickly. Still, everyone attending Mr. Bush's speech

at the United Nations last Saturday knew about them. And yet, no one

stood up and booed. No one walked out in protest. Bush's speech was

covered by all of the major newspapers and television networks in the

world, but no reporter for any news medium operating in the West

commented on his hypocrisy. No one mentioned Israel's terrorism.

Everyone knew, but everyone played along.

These people weren't lemmings. Lemmings really don't know any better.

Lemmings are essentially moral creatures; in fact they are

compulsively moral. To lemmings it is essential to feel and think and

act the way they believe they are expected to feel and think and act.

That's morality. Most groups of lemmings believe that it is bad to

lie, to deceive, to be hypocritical. If during George Bush's speech at

the United Nations a substantial part of the audience had walked out

in disgust, and at the end the remaining delegates had stood up and

booed him loudly, and if the media commentators then had remarked with

scorn to their television audiences that Bush is a hypocrite who talks

about stopping state-sponsored terrorism while continuing to finance

Israeli terrorism, the lemmings would have booed him too.

But Bush's lies and hypocrisy were ignored by the media and by the

other delegates. Instead of booing, they applauded him. And so the

lemmings applauded him too. It was all an act for the benefit of the

lemmings. Nearly all politics these days, nearly every speech or

public appearance by a politician or a government official, is an act

of showmanship. What is said has relatively little relationship to

what the politician

actually is thinking.

ertainly, last Saturday George Bush wasn't really thinking about

waging war on countries that sponsor terrorism or harbor terrorists.

He was thinking first and foremost about the importance of pleasing

the Jewish media with his speech. He may have been keeping his fingers

crossed and hoping that no Arab delegate would jump up during his

speech and shout at him, "What about Israel? You say that we should

wage war on states that sponsor terrorism. Israel engages in

state-sponsored terrorism more than Afghanistan and all the other

countries in the Middle East combined. When will you send your B-52s

to carpet-bomb Tel Aviv and Jerusalem?" And at the end he must have

marveled to himself how smoothly the act went and how easy it is to

deceive the public.

Crookedness of this sort has been going on for a long time. There are

only two things that make this latest crookedness noteworthy. First,

it is being used to justify yet another war that is not in the

interests of the American people. It is being used to justify dropping

cluster bombs on villagers whom we have no good reason to kill. And

second, it is a lot more obviously crooked than usual. Osama bin Laden

caught the Bush government and the media by surprise, and they didn't

have time to refine and polish their lies. All they could do was

pretend that they had no idea why he would attack the United States

and then claim that it must be because he hates our freedom. They

didn't have time to put up

their usual smokescreen of obfuscation. They simply launched their

denunciations of terrorism and terrorists and of governments that

tolerate terrorism and hoped that no one would say anything about

Israel or Ariel Sharon or Israel's policies of assassination and

torture.

Because the crookedness is more obvious now than usual, more

perceptive people than usual are noticing it and saying something

about it, and that's good. But these perceptive few who are unhappy

enough about the crookedness to speak out have little or no voice in

the mass media, and so the lemmings remain oblivious to the realities

of the situation.

That's the wonderful thing about democracy: you don't have to try to

fool all of the people; all you have to do is fool most of the people

all of the time, and that's pretty easy to do when you control the

mass media. You can just ignore the few who refuse to go along with

the act, and the great majority of the voters will never notice.

So why do I care that the system is crooked? Why should you care? Why

not just pretend not to notice the crookedness and go along with it,

like everyone else? Pretend to be a lemming, but stay alert to

possibilities for profiting from the fact that, unlike the lemmings,

you really are secretly aware of who's who and what's what. That's

what the

big shots do. That's what the people do who care only about themselves

and don't give a damn what happens to their country or their race or

the civilization built by their race, as long as they personally are

able to turn a profit from events. That's what George Bush does. He

pretends to care about all sorts of things. He pretends to be outraged

by terrorism, but he shakes Ariel Sharon's hand and gives him a big

hug whenever Sharon shows up in Washington. He pretends not to be

aware of Sharon's record as a mass murderer, a war criminal, a

terrorist, a man who sends out teams of assassins and orders the

Israeli police to torture prisoners.

A lot of people think and behave the way George Bush does. A lot of

people believe that's the only smart way to be. We're living in a

society in which a great many people are completely alienated,

completely disconnected from any sense of responsibility to race or

nation or to anyone but themselves: amoral people, people willing to

do anything they believe is personally advantageous, people for whom

every public expression is simply an act. And because there are so

many people like that, including virtually everyone in the government

and in the media, America is very, very sick.

I'll go further: individuals who think and behave that way are sick.

George Bush is a very sick man. Anyone who consciously and

deliberately betrays his own race or his own nation, anyone who

commits treason, is a defective person, a sick person. And George

Bush, by consciously following a policy he knows is not in the

interests of America but only serves Israel's interests, a policy he

knows is responsible for the September 11 attack against America, a

policy he continues to follow despite that knowledge, is a traitor.

That's George Bush I'm talking about, the President of the United

States. He may look stupid, but he knows what he's doing. George Bush

believes he's a smart guy, a guy who

knows which side his bread is buttered on, a guy who can get away with

anything as long as the Jewish media will back him up. And so far he

has been getting away with it. In a democracy, hypocrisy works; lying

works. As long as you have the mass media on your side you can get

away with anything, because the majority of the voters never will

figure it out.

What has been happening in Mazar-i-Sharif and Kabul and other northern

cities in Afghanistan this week is a good example. The big act put on

by George Bush and his British counterpart Tony Blair and all of their

media supporters since the campaign to destabilize Afghanistan began

last month -- the big act was that the Taliban is a bunch of

tyrannical fanatics who brutalize women, sponsor terrorism, and do

lots of other bad things, and the Northern Alliance, which was

supplied with weapons and money by the U.S. government while we bombed

the Taliban to smithereens, is a bunch of Sunday school teachers and

Boy Scouts. The United States will deliver Afghanistan into the hands

of the Northern Alliance, and then everything will be rosy and

peaceful and democratic. The people who had been tyrannized by the

Taliban will be free and happy

under the Northern Alliance. The Americans will be the good guys, who

have made this wonderful improvement possible.

Well, of course, it hasn't worked out that way. As soon as the

Northern Alliance took over each city it began rounding up people it

didn't like, people who belonged to the wrong tribe, for example, and

raping and killing them. There have been dozens of mass executions and

mass rapes by the Northern Alliance troops this week. There are a lot

of people they don't like. And the ones who just get raped or shot are

the lucky ones. Eyes are being gouged out, breasts are being cut off,

prisoners are being castrated and impaled and skinned alive or burned

to death. That's the way things are done in the Middle East. When the

British tried to pacify the country in the 19th century, the rule was

never to

let yourself be taken alive. If you were wounded and left behind, you

always saved your last cartridge for yourself. Rudyard Kipling wrote

about that:

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,

"And the women come out to cut up what remains,

"Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains

"An' go to your Gawd like a soldier."

The Russians learned the same lesson, to their sorrow, just a little

over a decade ago. And the military people around George Bush

certainly were aware of the experiences of the British and the

Russians. The Taliban indeed may be a rough and brutal bunch, but no

more rough and brutal than the people paid and armed by the U.S.

government. When the

Taliban was in charge at least there was peace and stability. There

were no massacres or gang rapes. The U.S. government, with its bombing

campaign and its mercenary troops in the Northern Alliance, has

succeeded in destabilizing large portions of Afghanistan, and the

rapes and mutilations and mass executions have started.

But the lemmings won't hear enough about that for it to sink in.

George Bush will continue lying and smirking and pretending that the

Northern Alliance are the good guys, and America is bringing freedom

and democracy and happiness to Afghanistan. What the United States

actually is trying to do is set up a government a little more corrupt

than that

of the Taliban: a government that we can control with bribes and

threats and that will not be a danger to Israel. That's the whole

purpose of our war against Afghanistan.

It's the same sort of crookedness that we saw in connection with the

Second World War. The pretext that the British government used for

declaring war against Germany in 1939 was the safeguarding of Poland's

freedom. When the Roosevelt government in the United States finally

was able to use the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as an excuse for

jumping into the war against Germany, the act by the media and the

politicians here was that Americans were being the good guys and would

bomb the Germans to smithereens in order to protect American freedom

and the freedom of Europe. And the people to whom we shipped military

supplies so they could help us were the Soviets under good old Uncle

Joe Stalin, that kind and fatherly fellow who also was being

threatened by the wicked Germans.

Of course, what we did, after carpet-bombing German cities and killing

enough Germans to make them surrender, was turn Poland and the Baltic

states and half the rest of Europe over to communist rule for half a

century. It had never been the intention of either the British

government or the U.S. government to free anybody. We knew what sort

of people the communists were. We knew that they had butchered the

cream of the Polish nation in the Katyn forest and elsewhere - 25,000

Polish military officers and professors and physicians and engineers

and writers - but our government and media people pretended that it

was the Germans who had done it and that we were "liberating" Europe

from the

Germans and protecting American freedom, which never was threatened by

the Germans.

It was all an act. The aim was not to safeguard anybody's freedom; it

was to destroy Germany because the Germans had gotten the Jews off

their backs and out of their country. We made war against Germany in

order to make Europe safe for the Jews and for no other reason. We are

making war against Afghanistan now in order to make the Middle East

safe for the Jews, and for no other reason. Everything else is an act

to keep the public fooled. And the public will be fooled: just as they

never figured out what World War Two was all about, they won't figure

out what the war against Afghanistan is all about. They may hear

rumors about the massacres being carried out now by the Northern

Alliance, but the television people won't spell it out for them, won't

show them gory pictures of the piles of corpses, and so the public

won't get it.

So again, why should you care? Why not just go along with the act, the

way the big shots do?

That's a hard question to answer, in this sense: If you're like George

Bush or any of the other big shots who think they're being smart by

going along with the act and collaborating with the Jews against their

own people - if you think that's the smart way to behave - then you

won't understand my answer, no matter how carefully I explain it. If

you're a person who already is totally alienated - if you're an amoral

person who already is completely disconnected from your race and its

traditions and values and you think of yourself solely as an

individual scrambling to get an advantage over other individuals by

any means that will work - you won't understand my answer.

But if you still have some sense of being a part of something larger

and more permanent than yourself -- if you still have a sense of

racial identity, a sense of kinship with a larger family of fellow

Europeans, of fellow White men and women with whom you share

traditions and values and a way of looking at the world - if you value

the civilization your ancestors built over the last 5,000 years, if

you think of it as your civilization - then my answer is superfluous.

You already know the answer. You already understand why you must not

collaborate with creatures who secretly sneer at your values, who are

contemptuous of the traditions and history of your people, who have

been working for

thousands of years to corrupt your civilization, and who are

determined to annihilate your race. You already understand why men who

do collaborate with these creatures must not be permitted to make laws

and set policies governing your people. You understand that instead of

being applauded and looked at with respect, they should be hanged as

traitors

and as a warning to others who might be tempted also to betray our

people. You already understand that truthfulness and righteousness are

their own reward.

Thanks for being with me again today.

http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html http://www.nsm88.com/

"Ghamph" <ghamph@localnet.com> wrote in message

news:134k1thdqppq325@corp.supernews.com...

> NUKE MECCA AND DESTROY ISLAM

YeeHAW!

Do it NOW!

What did the nazi say when he was being simultaneously attacked from the

front by Israelis and from the rear by suicidal moslem jihadis?

"We National Socialists have grown accustomed since our takeover in

1933 to the particular attention of the leading politicians of the

U.S.A. and of the international Jews who stand behind them. Our

defensive measures against international Jewry have aroused increasing

tirades against Germany in America. Sometimes it seemed as if it would

be impossible to increase the flood of hatred and lies...

After leading politicians such as the American Secretary of the

Interior Harold Ickes and Senator Pittman attacked the German

government in the foulest manner, President Roosevelt did even more in

his New Year address. He tried to persuade the American people that

world peace was not assured, and that it was the duty of the American

people to defend three vital principles: those of religion, democracy

and international good will. Roosevelt did not believe these

principles were threatened by Soviet Russia or Soviet Spain, rather by

authoritarian Germany and Italy.

Millions are dead in Soviet Russia and Spanish priests estimate that a

half million people have been murdered there only because of their

faith, but that is not important and proves nothing. The dead do not

trouble the American President's conscience, indeed they did not stop

him from being the single world statesman to congratulate the Soviet

Russian government on the anniversary of the Bolshevist Revolution. No

other statesman did this, which explains why no other statesman

received such praise from the Soviet press. The Soviet press praised

the "noble efforts of the great American statesman."

Roosevelt also ignored the murder of millions of people when it was

called to his attention by a letter from the former Spanish ambassador

in Great Britain, the Marquis de Merry del Wal. The ambassador told

Mr. Roosevelt the following:

Your country's press tells the world of Your Excellency's protests

against the "persecution of the Jews" in Germany. According to the

press, you are deeply distressed by these events. How is it then that

the murder and massacre of 400,000 defenseless men, women and children

in Spain has not resulted in the slightest distress on your part?

These unfortunate people did not die on the battlefields of a civil

war. They were torn from their homes and murdered in public not only

because of their political, but also their religious, beliefs. Their

murderers openly declared their goal of destroying the very

civilization that Your Excellency defends. They have intentionally

destroyed thousands of churches and monuments along with uncounted

works of art and private homes. They have torn the clothes from nuns

and revealed them to everyone's eyes. They raped women and looted to a

degree unknown in the annals of the Christian era.

Your own ambassador, Your Excellency, against all the laws, norms and

customs of international law, has been forced to live away from the

government to which he is accredited, since as he said his personal

security would otherwise be in danger. I further know, Your

Excellency, that you have received certain proof of my assertions, for

I have made efforts to ensure that you have received reports that

support what I have said. Despite that, Your Excellency, you complain

about events in Germany, events that cannot be compared with what is

happening in Spain-and you have not given even the slightest sign of

disapproval at the death of hundreds of thousands of people who have

18 million fellow believers who are among the best citizens of your

country, far more than the two million Jews.

These people have been murdered solely because of their beliefs. Mr.

Roosevelt however has never spoken of a threat to faith or religion.

But they were only believers in a Christian church, after all. Mr.

Roosevelt is conducting a crusade against the authoritarian states

under the banner of religion only because the religious compatriots of

his closest friends have been put in their place in the authoritarian

states.

If President Roosevelt believes that he has to take the field to

defend democracy, we may ask where and when we have ever threatened or

attacked democracy. In the past years Germany has done nothing more

than to partially undo the injustices inflicted on it by the

predecessor of the current president of the U.S.A. Germany has not

arbitrarily altered the map of Europe as he did, creating states

against the will of their peoples only for purposes of power politics.

It has only reclaimed its citizens who suffered a decade long under

governments foreign or hostile to Germany...

In a closed session, he told the Defense Committee of the Senate that

the United States must be ready to support England and France in the

event of a European war. The President reportedly even suggested that

definite agreements already existed to this effect. He further

proposed the unrestricted sale of war materials to Western Europe. The

only restriction was that they had to be able to pay for it. When a

member of the American Senate asked how this policy could be squared

with the law demanding strict neutrality over against Europe,

Roosevelt replied: "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it."

These revelations naturally were a sensation throughout the world. The

impact was greater than the master of the White House in Washington

wanted. He therefore denied the reports. The force of his denial was

somewhat weakened by excited reports in the American press in which

various members of Congress refused to be called liars, and

furthermore suggested that Roosevelt had said even more during the

session than has been reported. The force of the denial was also

weakened by a cynical article in a French newspaper that noted that

"the strength of the claim has not been weakened, for it is not a

matter of the letter of the law, but of the spirit."...

Roosevelt is acting as the mouthpiece and puppet of international

Jewry when he attacks the authoritarian states. They want to use every

means to destroy the newly awakened nations...

The leaders of the Soviet Union tried to persuade their people that

true communism could only develop after all the other states of the

world were allies of the powers in Moscow, and the Red rulers in

Soviet Spain tried and tried to conceal their governmental

incompetence by unleashing a world conflict. We are not surprised to

see the American President in such company. The real rulers of the

Soviet Union are the same as in the United States: international

Jewry.

The truth of this claim is confirmed by the behavior of the wife of

the American President. Mrs. Roosevelt, as a sign of her support for

the Spanish Bolshevist rulers, accepted a gift of stolen etchings by

Spanish masters. Mrs. Roosevelt chaired an exhibition of busts of

Spanish Communist leaders, made by the Jew Josef Davidson. She also

invited the well-known top Bolshevist Toller to lunch. She surrounds

herself with wounded bigwigs of Soviet Spain under whose orders

500,000 Spaniards were killed only because they were faithful to their

beliefs and their religion...

America today is not governed by men like Roosevelt, Ickes, etc.,

rather its fate is determined by the Jews who stand behind them, Jews

like Baruch, Frankfurter, Morgenthau, etc. They are the real rulers of

America, and Roosevelt, Ickes, etc., are only their tools. The fact

that this is known in America is evident from a variety of newspaper

articles. The "New York Daily News," for example, wrote that "the wave

of anti-Semitism in America has increased significantly in recent

weeks and months." The fact that the Jew Bernard Baruch, the

President's closest adviser, is called the unofficial president of the

United States is proof of this fact.

But enough of that. We refuse to interfere in the affairs of other

nations. We think that every country gets the Jews that it deserves.

But we demand the same principle be extended to us. Let Mr. Roosevelt

carry out his reforms and crusades in his own country. He will not

live long enough to do it all. We do not think we have yet seen

anything on the other side of the ocean that is worth imitating. We

think it not a sign of ability, rather of incompetence, that a nation

with such enormous resources and space, with all modern methods, finds

itself in such mass misery and is unable to do anything to alleviate

that misery.

Where would Roosevelt be if he had had to deal with the situation the

F

So, what solution do you offer??

"Firnando" <geovani_the_italian@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1179328669.273157.308020@q23g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> Different anti-Islam troll, same crap

>