Re-Writing History for Hate

History Book or Agenda-for-Profiteering tool?

 

“MEDIEVAL WORLD: A CREATION OF ISLAM”  is an item by John J O’Neill in the bigoted SIOE offshoot of Pamela Geller’s hate-for-profiteering efforts. 

It is nothing less than a farce in the face of history and I would have ignored it completely except that it is a perfect example of how history is full of such efforts in changing history, abusing its context, to somehow have one side look better of the only option at the expense of others.  In this case it is to create hate for profit but the tools are the same.  

We can add that if John J O’Neill wishes to be considered academic, then why does he avoid context, all facts and tellingly write for and associate with the likes of Geller and would-be-academics like the blogger Robert Spencer? 

Do go to the link and read its style, to learn how well worded text may look scholarly but in fact when looked into are just ugly propoganda tools.  I wrote the following reply, I doubt it will stay long, thus my publishing it here. 

It is a tragedy when one tries to write history to prove an agenda, rather than discover facts based on studying the history in the first place.  The author has most certainly failed on this case, and clearly struggles in desperation to find source to justify it. 

Henri Pirenne is regarded as a history writer of Belgium and now is rather discarded as an example of a time when Belgium tried to justify itself when it was simply a creation of politics at that time.  Similarly, his wider histories are basically ignored as part of that Western-Christian exceptionalism that was so common, and a failure when it came to actually history. 

Most certainly great cities and civilizations existed before and after the ascendancy of Arab and Muslim expansion. Seville had great bridges, viaducts and bathhouses, built by Romans.  Most civilizations expanded and built upon the previous, or destroyed them.  What is the point of O’Neil’s writings but an attempt to somehow temporarily ignore that fact only for the Arabs and Muslims? 

The undeniable fact was that the Arabs and Berbers moved in to locations like Southern Iberia and not only supported what was worth keeping but expanded and added more.  That at that time, Europe was in decline if not moving backwards whilst the Muslim World was in many places starting their own Golden Age.   Cordoba became a centre for learning and science whilst its neighbours were often sleeping in the same room with their sheep, pigs and cows.  Whilst philosophy, astronomy and the words of Aristotle and Plato were being restored, discussed and expanded on – Europe was burning those thinking of such things as witches and heretics. 

Just as undeniable is that the clash of faiths existed, brutality and anti-semitism existed on both sides and histories were often fabrications to support agendas. 

O’Neil attempts to read those that suit his agenda as truths whilst ignoring others and their contexts.  At worst he fails to at least mention other views and leave the questions to the readers, that for him would be defeatist to his agenda. 

The Library of Alexander was destroyed at least four times to varying degrees, rumours of it being finished off by Muslims for various reasons have resonated for years, mostly incorrect and most certainly forgetting the Great Fire of the Alexandrian War in 48 BC, the SAcking by Aurellian in the 3rd Century and the vetting of the un-Godly texts by Pope Theophilus (Copt) in 391.   Most certainly Caliph Umar chose to get rid of what was left of the Library because it stored Ismaili texts that were creating schisms in the empire.  This is well documented.  The problem was that Christianity wanted to say otherwise, such as the equally well documented hoax of Pococke’s translation of “History of the Dynasties” in 1663. 

The only question that comes from this item is why was it written and for what agenda, hate or profit – my bet is a little bit of both. 

Donny vdH
Rotterdam
blootstellen.wordpress.com
 

The Cordoba Initiative Revisited

As an update to my previous item on the Cordoba Initiative, the building of a large Mosque and Community Centre a few blocks away from the 9/11 site in New York, the Project appears to be continuing with legal efforts failing to stop it.

I have stated in my blog and in some forums that I am against the Project, but for none of the reasons pushed by the ugly agenda driven groups leading the opposition.   I have not seen evidence enough from the Project that demographics demand the location and that radicalization and other political agendas will not take over the Project.   From what I have seen, there is enough radical, ultra-conservative and outside influences that seep into America’s Muslims, regardless of the best intentions to stop it.  The combination of these two points for me is enough to say, do not build it, or at least do not build it there.  Demographics is important, as it is still a Mosque, they say they want the Project to be a national symbol and a monument to inter-faith dialogue, I support that – so why not in Washington DC as a site?

Today I read in the “Upshot” section of Yahoo News an item by John Cook called “Mosque’s opponents have taken opposite position in court” showing the hypocrisy of some of the forces trying to stop the Project.  It is very telling.

It tells us that many of the players trying to block the project have in fact used the laws that are supporting the Project to support the building of Churches and other houses of worship and yet are now opposing these very same laws.  Cook says “Oddly, many of the groups leading and supporting the campaign against the so-called mosque have a history of arguing in favor of religious freedom on similar cases.”

Family of 9/11 Victims are pushed emotionally by those with agenda hate to assume Islam itself is the cause of their suffering.

The American Center for Law and Justice, the legal advocacy group leading the charge, has argued repeatedly and forcefully in federal court on at least three occasions that local land-use laws such as historical landmark designations don’t trump the religious and property rights of religious groups to build houses of worship. So has the Anti-Defamation League, which controversially came out in opposition to the mosque last week. The group has filed no less than five amicus briefs in federal court arguing that local governments can’t use zoning laws to prevent the building of churches and synagogues.

Indeed, these groups all compose part of a large ecosystem of religious-rights organizations; members of such groups have made frequent use of a federal law that erects significant barriers for local governments seeking to interfere with religious buildings. With few exceptions, in the case of Cordoba House, these groups have either been silent or directly contradicted their own history of statements and action.

The American Center for Law and Justice, the legal advocacy group leading the charge, has argued repeatedly and forcefully in federal court on at least three occasions that local land-use laws such as historical landmark designations don’t trump the religious and property rights of religious groups to build houses of worship. So has the Anti-Defamation League, which controversially came out in opposition to the mosque last week. The group has filed no less than five amicus briefs in federal court arguing that local governments can’t use zoning laws to prevent the building of churches and synagogues.

Indeed, these groups all compose part of a large ecosystem of religious-rights organizations; members of such groups have made frequent use of a federal law that erects significant barriers for local governments seeking to interfere with religious buildings. With few exceptions, in the case of Cordoba House, these groups have either been silent or directly contradicted their own history of statements and action.

More condemning:

The group’s website says it “remains committed to the principle that the use of zoning laws to curtail the religious freedoms of churches is unconstitutional.”

The group’s shift on Cordoba House indicates it may not believe the same rights should be afforded to mosques as “churches.” ACLJ wrote a letter to the New York City Planning Commission [pdf] urging it to confer landmark status on the building and Wednesday, after the Planning Commission unanimously voted not to interfere with the construction of the mosque, ACLJ vowed to pursue the matter in state court, and today filed suit seeking to stop construction of Cordoba House.

I find it interesting that with all the blogosphere hype and a few very short appearances on cable, Pamela Geller who claims to be the leader of the anti-Mosque movement, is not mentioned at all.  Her greatness is obviously in her own mind and she will make her racist, bigoted and self-congratulatory remarks as if she will stop the Project by her own super-powers.

I hope the Project does not go ahead, as I have mentioned, not for bigoted and agenda-for-profiteering reasons.  They simply have to work harder to justify it.

Walid Shoebat: Con Artist and Hate-for-Profiteer

Often the name Walid Shoebat comes up in the anti-Islam blogosphere; praised as a “former terrorist”, the honest zealous convert to Christianity, writes books about the ugliness of Islam, his defending of Israel and his warnings about jihad taking over America.   Sounds too much, as Sarah Palin would say “you bet ya!”

Walid Shoebat is a con artist – who pushes his questionable history to advantage, abused his heritage for advantage, became a zealous evangelical Christian either for profit or out of madness and hangs around other hate-for-profiteers to roll-around in self-praise.

Shoebat is half-Palestinian, half-American, not that this matters.  He claims to be a former PLO terrorist but as many have pointed out, there is no evidence of such and the example he gives, of attacking an Israeli bank is rejected by the Bank itself, the PLO and the Jerusalem Post  as absurd  (Bank Leumi said that “after checking its files, the bank said it had no record of an attack on its Bethlehem branch anywhere in the relevant 1977-79 period”.) .   His links to Evangelical groups that have also claimed to have had ex-terrorists amongst them, with equal questionable backgrounds, has only added to the doubt of this farce.

This evangelical link has had mixed benefit and added hypocrisy for Shoebat.  Chosing to go down this path guarantees an audience and book buyers, thus income.  At the same time, he has to sell to the religious zealots and this falls flat.

Recently Shoebat claimed that the word “666″ in the Book of Revelation was actually a misreading of the Arabic phrase “in the name of Allah”, supernaturally revealed to the author who copied the Arabic script as he saw it.”  That he had seen this “Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus”.   As one popular Christian blogger pointed out, ”  So, does the  Codex Sinaiticus offer any better evidence to favour Shoebat’s claim? The digitised text has just been made available on-line, and the answer is, as expected, ”no”. The Codex Sinaiticus actually spells the number out as “six hundred and sixty six.  In other words, Shoebat’s claim is an epic fail at all levels, and as regards the Codex Sinaiticus he either lied about seeing it or lied about what he saw”.

In late 2007 Shoebat along with those other Evangelicals were involved in the Colorado Springs Air Force Academy contraversy.   Elements of the US Air Force Academy’s religous right allowed Shoebat and two others under the banner of anti-terrorism experts  to speak to the students.    It was described by Prof. Douglas Howard, who teaches the history of the modern Middle East at Calvin College in Grand Rapids said “It was just an old time gospel hour — ‘Jesus can change your life, he changed mine,’ that is mixed in with ‘Watch out America, wake up America, the danger of Islam is here.’ ”   Professor Howard said his doubts about their authenticity grew after stories like the Golan Heights saga as well as something on Mr. Saleem’s Web site along the lines that he was descended from the grand wazir of Islam. “The grand wazir of Islam is a nonsensical term.”   (Saleem, one of the three is Kamal Saleem, who has a similar hate-for-profit website and makes outrageous claims of being an important terrorist and who “educates state and federal political leaders, military leaders, intelligence specialists, security officials and contractors, law enforcement agencies”, yet does not even merit even a Wikipedia page).  As someone who has worked with the national security, law enforcement and other agencies, one does not advertise it without serious back-up or one does not advertize it at all.

Shoebat’s website has the standard three elements that hate-for-profiteers seem to have in common.  It has lots of phrases/links to horrible acts or radical quotes, it praises those that give him money (in this case it is pro-right-wing Israeli and Evangelical, and lastly it has lots of money-making links and pictures of his books.   There is not much academic, newsworthy and impartial in any of it.  It quotes Martin Luther King Jr about love, without considering it disrespectful and most certainly the great man would have considered Shoebat a fraud.    

Amongst the quotes of Shoebat in his website he proudly claims that “”The occupation is in the minds of Children who are taught hatred.”  That is strange considering all but pro-Settlers consider Israel “occupied”.  Even the Prime Minister of Israel calls it a occuption.   We assume that there is no “Two State Solution” option for Shoebat, that the race of his father simply does not exist.  Why is that Walid?   It may be in his other quote “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”.   We can guess that identity is not an issue for him and he is carefully following the ultra-orthodox political line that Palestinians are Jordanians and should go there.   For a devout American Evangelist, why is he towing a dangerous, fringe ultra-orthodox Jewish party-line?    He is often targeted as being a pawn of Israel.  I do not know that, but he may very well have sold-out to a certain fringe radical group within it, a bit like Wilders, with no logical connection that can be fathomed except for money, support and sales.

On the same front page as the above quotes, Shoebat also says that “The Israeli Arab Conflict is not about geography but about Jew hatred” and yet a few lines down says “No one (Arab or Jew) has a “right of return” Jews who fled Arab persecution from 1948 to 1956 should have no right of return to Arab lands, and Arabs who ran away in 1948 and 1967 should have no right of return either”.    So it is about land afterall and conveniently Jews should not have a right of return to lands that they do not want to go back to anyhow?  Get real Walid, the subject is about land and your following the Settler Arguments down to the full stop at the end of the sentence.

The question of Israel for me is about radicalism, those against it and those defending it with the average person on both sides of the border suffering for it.    The Settler Movement is an ugly religous-based excuse for land-grabbing and is as evil as the radical hijackers who took over the resistance against it.   Walid Shoebat may claim to be an Evangelist, from his work above he is failing to prove that, but there is no doubt that he is used, abused and backed by the radical Zionist Settler Movement.

Sham, scam-artist, con-man, hypocrite, cultural sell-out, ugly radical – take your pick, all are good descriptive of the scum known as Walid Shoebat, profiteer from hate.

More ugly Pamela Geller Oshry rhetoric – add racism and bigotry to hypocrisy

The blogger and wannabe famous Pamela Geller in her Atlasshrugs blog has yet again pushed new boundaries of hate, bigotry, racism and hypocrisy.  This time, the targeting of a Bronx Eid prayer that due to numbers in the Mosque spilled over onto the street.  With a series of photos we see the hypocrisy show itself to a new height through the comments made.

She says “we put up with” as a comment on the overspill on the street.  On another she calls it “crazy”, we must wonder what is crazy, that Maddison street is being used for a public event?  Or that they are not Jews or Muslims?  If there was a public prayer service by one of the Churches or Synagogues, would she say the same?  I doubt it.

They took a photo of a senior police inspector, a Muslim, praying as well (but of course she calls it dropping down).   What is very interesting is that she also dares to assume that “He seems awfully damn young to be that high up the ranks.”, would she say that if he was not Muslim, not darker skinned or Jewish?  Again, we doubt that at all.

There is a close-up of shoes, which are taken-off during prayer and neatly put to side as to not get in the way or dirty other’s prayer spaces – she calls it “shoes praying” to demonize and make jokes.  If it was a comment on Jews it would be condemned as pure anti-Semitic, racist and bigoted – bingo Pamela Geller your showing your true ugly repugnant colours.

The hypocrisy comes with her comments about women praying at the back.  Trying to raise the specter of Rosie Parker whom was that famous lady who refused to sit down in the back during American segregation times.   I wonder if the pro-Israel, pro-Jewish self-proclaimed protector has to say about women in synagogues, Prayer services and in ultra-orthodox Jewish society.  Get real Pamela!

Another photo is from the front of the prayers as the men bow down, showing their head-dress – the Kaffiyah – she calls them the “modern-day swastikas” trying to link the headdress of Muslims to Nazism.  I find that most hypocritical – and of course bigoted, considering that Jews also have a near-similar skull-cap and for exactly the same reasons as Muslims do.  Does that mean that Jews are also wearing modern day swastikas?  Wow, I could be called anti-Semite for saying that  but I would blame Pamela Geller for that one too!

What in hell’s name does she think she is?  No wonder she is not taken seriously.  Even CNN’s last item on her so-called Mega-Mosque demonstration cut her own comments from the third showing.  She still does not merit a place in Wiki and that has to be sign. 

Through her ex-husband and business ties, Geller-Oshry has been linked to a serious criminal luxury car-selling scheme.  Though she has denied involvement and the business that she was a partner in is now scrapped, considering her ugly side and the reality that ugly people are often involved in other ugly events, one wonders.

Abusing the name of Neda

We all remember the brutal death of Neda Agha-Soltan, the young Iranian musician, just over a year ago in Tehran.   Her story and short life is well-known and is not the subject here.  The purpose of this post is to show how her death is being disrespected and abused by agendas.

In a blog that I sometimes comment in, her name came up and it spurred me to respond as follows:

Interesting you mentioned Neda Soltan.  I find it strange and some what hypocritical that some blogs (and this is not at your blog, I have not seen it here, so do not get me wrong) will put photos of Neda Soltan on their blogs right next to the I love Israel banner.  That is fine by itself within some frameworks, but the self-proclaimed anti-Jihad blogs do that all the time and bag Iran constantly but have forgotten some simple facts.  If one reads on the history, actions and opinions of Neda Soltan, she was most certainly anti-Israel, perhaps anti-Semite to a degree as most Iranians of her generation are, she prayed five times a day (a devout Muslim), was a supporter of the previous Iranian regime – pre-Ahmadinejad – and was very pro-Palestinian.  She almost certainly would have supported the f lotilla and given half the chance joined it.  She said to her family that she joined the street protests because of the radical-militancy of the Revolutionary Guard and its continued influence and corruption of the “Iranian Democracy”.

 We should all remember the symbol of Neda Soltan but in the contest of what she was and represented, not what others “wish her to represent”.

I have seen at least 15 such blogs now that do this, including from some of the well-known bloggers that I have criticized on Blootstellen.  If I see it, I will comment saying such and all but one simply deleted my comment than make some form of justification – which only confirms what I have said.

The likes of Geller, Spencer and others will sing her story as proof, quietly hiding the fact that she would have condemned them for their pathetic and ugly distortions and views.

Question: Ignoring the “other war” – Agenda Avoidance?

The Mexican Drug War - 18,000 direct casualties and 100k plus indirect victims in America

Time Magazine’s “Ioan Grillo” said in a report that:

While the Mexican crime families do not have a history of using bombs, explosive devices used to be a favored tactic of their associates in Colombia. In the 1980s and 1990s, the Medellin cartel responded to a government crackdown with bombs on street corners, cars and even one passenger jet, killing hundreds. Colombian gangsters have long been selling cocaine to the Mexican cartels, who smuggle it into the United States. “The cartels could be turning to this Colombian tactic of using terror to pressure the government to back off,” said Mexican drug expert Jorge Chabat. “They may be trying to raise the political cost for Calderon of carrying out his campaign.”

The author Stephanie Hanson, for the Council on Foreign Relations, put it in clearer lines:

About 90 percent of the cocaine that enters the United States is trafficked through Mexico, ……. International Narcotics Control Strategy Report. Mexico’s extensive cocaine trade is controlled by cartels based in border areas and along the southeast coast. Three groups–the Sinaloa Cartel, the Gulf Cartel, and the Tijuana Cartel–have waged an increasingly violent turf war over key trafficking routes and “plazas,” or border crossing areas.

Violence reached acute levels in 2006 and has only worsened since then; decapitations became common and cartels began disseminating videos documenting gruesome deaths-“narco messages”-to threaten rival cartels and government officials. While initially the majority of violence was between cartel members, in the past two years, police officers, journalists, and politicians have become frequent targets of drug killings. In May 2008, for instance, Mexico’s acting federal police chief was killed in a drug hit.

Every other day, reports of large numbers of death, mass graves found, decapitated bodies or gun battles appears on news items in front of us, but those quotes of Grillo and Hanson above are from 2008.   In today’s figures, more than 18,000 victims of the war, and it is a declared war by the Mexican Government against Drug Cartels, has made the conflict as big as the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan.   If you consider that at least 20,000 people in the US die each year from illegal drugs (and that is a figure only scratching the surface) then since the war started that makes 120,000 other war victims.

According to Kristin Bricker of the Narcosphere website, in her February 2009, item “Is Mexican Drug War Violence Ebbing?” she argued correctly then that the figures are huge but for domestic politics, perhaps the figures are worse than reported.  We know now, how true she was.

The Mexican Attorney General’s Office (PGR) reports that as of March 13 of this year it had counted 10,475 executions since the beginning of President Felipe Calderon’s term on December 1, 2006.  Furthermore, almost 10% (997) of the victims were public servants.2007’s official (according to the PGR) death toll of 2,477.  The NGO, the Citizen Council for Public Security and Criminal Justice, had requested the year’s organized crime death toll broken down by month and by state.   In response, the Mexican Attorney General’s Office released one sheet of paper (PDF file) breaking down the violent death toll by state, but not by month. official count for 2008 (released this past February only after an NGO filed a Freedom of Information request), 6,262* people died “violent deaths” in 2008–a 154% increase over PGR’sAccording to the 25% decrease over the last three months of 2008. (The AP reported that the drop occurred when the first three months of 2009 are compared to the first three months of 2008, but that is a misinterpretation of government officials’ statements). has recorded during the first three months of 2009 constitutes a PGRThe Mexican government has been quick to manipulate the 2009 numbers to demonstrate some sort of success in the war on drugs.  Eduardo Medina Mora, the Federal Attorney General, told press that the approximately 1,600 executions the the most violent period of the Calderon administration occurred in January 2009: between December 26, 2008, and January 27, 2009–a period of 32 days–one thousand people were executed.  It points out that in 2007, it took 115 days to reach the first one thousand executions of the year; in 2008, 120 days.  Milenio also notes that the most violent day of Calderon’s term was February 12 of this year, when 52 organized crime-related violent deaths were reported.  January 2009 was also the most deadly January under Calderon’s watch: Milenio counted 480 executions in January 2009, 247 in January 2008, and 204 in January 2007., however, notes that Milenio

Now, in mid-2010, the war continues and the gruesome accounts simply increases the death-toll no end.   In January Jo Tuckman’s Guardian item which is reporting official figures gives as a simple report on what is something sadly now daily:

The start of 2010 has been marked by a major escalation of Mexico‘s drug wars, increasing pressure on a government already struggling to convince many that its military-focused strategy will eventually bring the cartels to heel.

El Universal newspaper reported today that 69 people had died violently in the previous 24-hour period, the biggest daily death toll yet in the struggle for supremacy within Mexican organised crime that lies at the heart of the wars. The paper said that 283 people had died in 2010 so far, more than double the figure from the same period last year.

Horrible but unfortunately a reality. According to some, it seems that this can only happen at the hands of another group of people.....

As a background, and quoting Wikipedia’s summary, The Mexican Drug War is an armed conflict taking place between rival drug cartels and government forces in Mexico. Although Mexican drug cartels, or drug trafficking organizations, have existed for a few decades, they have become more powerful since the demise of Colombia’s Cali and Medellín cartels in the 1990s. Mexican drug cartels now dominate the wholesale illicit drug market in the United States.  Arrests of key cartel leaders, particularly in the Tijuana and Gulf cartels, have led to increasing drug violence as cartels fight for control of the trafficking routes into the United States.

Mexico, a major drug producing and transit country, is the main foreign supplier of cannabis and a major supplier of methamphetamine to the United States.  Although Mexico accounts for only a small share of worldwide heroin production, it supplies a large share of the heroine distributed in the United States.  Drug cartels in Mexico control approximately 70% of the foreign narcotics that flow into the United States.  The State Department estimates that 90% of cocaine entering the United States transits Mexico—Colombia being the main cocaine producer—and that wholesale of illicit drug sale earnings estimates range from $13.6 billion to $48.4 billion annually.  Mexican drug traffickers increasingly smuggle money back into Mexico in cars and trucks, likely due to the effectiveness of U.S. efforts at monitoring electronic money transfers.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the death-toll since the 2006 start of the War, is now over 18,000.  With such a figure then why is it that something that indirectly is killing more North Americans than both wars combined, not argued as passionately in the media as the two more famous conflicts?   Why is it that the far-right commentators, elements of America’s Tea-Party movement and the radical bloggers spending all their times on issues such as the life of people under militant and radical Islamist regimes (and condemning anything and everything “Muslim” or “Islamic”) but completely ignoring a vicious war on their doorstep that has, and is having, a greater impact on their own lives?

Could it be that it is still viewed as “just a war on crime?”   I find that a foolish thought, it is about control, power, corruption and social issues.   It  is about the drug culture it should not be forgotten that the existence of such horrors steams to the equally horrible drug needs of its clients, and in this case up to 90 per cent American.

Does the far-right movement in America carefully avoid the subject for their own agenda?   I think so.  They can shout about an oil-spill and somehow blame it on the “left” and certainly will milk every bad result as miss-handling by their nemesis Obama.   The Spill is a catastrophe, no doubt, so is the larger problem of a drug-war killing more people than the two wars. 

Of these wars, the extreme-right and hate-for-profiteers such as the bloggers Spencer and Geller will try to make it more a social-issue – attempting to imply an entire faith followed by a quarter of mankind is out to destroy the world, yet a real, proven and present social issue killing

The Drug Project says around 20,000 people are killed each year in the United States from illicit drugs.

77.6 billion dollars is used by the US Government to deal with Drug abusers Economic Costs of Drug Abuse.  They say that “In 1999, Americans Spent $63.2 Billion on Illegal Drugs”, and worse:

Illegal drugs exact a staggering cost on American society. In 1995, they accounted for an estimated $110 billion in expenses and lost revenue.116 This public-health burden is shared by all of society, directly or indirectly. Tax dollars pay for increased law enforcement, incarceration, and treatment to stem the flow of illegal drugs and counter associated negative social repercussions. NIDA estimated that health-care expenditures due to drug abuse cost America $9.9 billion in 1992 and nearly twelve billion dollars in 1995.117

Pamela Geller Hates History, Facts & Opinion

The ultra-conservative, hate-for-profiteer blogger Pamela Geller hates history, factual evidence and even opinions that are not her own or follow her agenda.  We all know that but I thought I would mention it anyway.

Her blog, Atlasshrugs, is a platform for making wild accusations, assumptions and implications with the obvious intention of allowing radical mob-rule to do the rest.  Her blog is typical of her making the comments or fabrications and then allowing some pretty ugly henchmen or henchwomen do the rest.  Making a comment against the item results not in debate, evidence, but simply rat-bag personal attacks and regular “p*ss off” comments.

Like with the hate-blogger Robert Spencer, I lasted about a week before being cut-off with no comment, simply put my posts disappear.  Interestingly the more you show facts, the nastier the responses and it was in today’s rubbish that they could not take the history lessons or facts and bingo, my posts were chopped.

Today she had shamelessly called a post “Shocking video, Muslim propoganda” about the blockade in Gaza.  She and Spencer have been showing a number of photos and YouTube videos of what is supposed to be Gazan fruit markets, full of wonderful fresh fruits and vegetables and making the assumption that if anything, life is better in Gaza than ever.  One commentor even suggested that the markets of Gaza offered better produce than in their home supermarket in the US.   I pointed out that I would rather have confidence in the live reports, constant updates and assessments from well scrutinized and respected media outlets, international organisations, NGOs, governments and diplomatist that are all constantly scrutinized than her well-known agenda based reports.   My post disappeared in a flash.

Robert Spencer is always overwhelmed by Pamela in photos together....

Another post was a series about the Nazi Links of the Brotherhood and the Mufti at that period.  The photos and commentary was basically making that implication that Muslims are still Nazis. 

 I gave her and her mobsters a history lesson and pointed out the pan-Arab nationalism and how it is well documented and yes the links to radical Islamism.   I also pointed out the historical facts, such as independence movements often chosing siding with “the enemy of my enemy” and that Bengali-communist inspired independence movements did so with Japan and Catholic Croats did so with Hitler and the Axis movement as well.   History does not lie, I pointed out and quoted Erasum Rotterdamus when he said that History and facts take no sides but man hides them …… . 

Pamela obviously has a problem with history and facts, and needs to hide them.

What deep down psychosis do we make from someone who advertises as this?

One thing that I find odd about Pamela is that she shows an image on her blog, of her dressed as “Superwomen” and thinks it looks cool and is obviously proud of it.   I find it telling about how she is willing to sell herself so cheaply, like her ugliness, and obviously has a desire to be loved and respected.   When has being a vulgar radical ever brought love and respect?