Interviewer: 'Would You, as a Human Being, be Willing to Shake Hands with a Jew?'
"Of course I wouldn't be willing to shake hands with a Jew, for religious reasons and because of what is happening now in Palestine, and for many reasons that don't allow me to shake a Jew's hand."
"No. Because the Jews are eternal enemies. The murderous Jews violate all agreements. I can't shake hands with someone who I know is full of hatred towards me."
"No, the Jew is an enemy. How can I shake my enemy's hand?"
Interviewer: "Would you refuse to shake hands with a Jew?"
"Of course, so I wouldn't have to consider amputating my hand afterwards."
Interviewer: 'If a Child Asks You Who 'Who are the Jews,' What Would You Answer?'
"The enemies of Allah and His Prophet."
"The Jew is the occupier of our lands."
"The murderers of prophets. Our eternal enemies, of course."
"The murderers of prophets, that's it."
9/11, al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden and Patriot Act are all new entries in the second edition of the Encarta Webster's Dictionary of the English Language to be released next week.Encarta Webster's Dictionary Reflects 9/11 Language
And with new definitions assigned in the popular lexicon for Ground Zero and Gulf War, many of the additions are connected to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the Bush administration's war on terror which has dominated the news ever since that day when almost 3,000 died.
The new dictionary entries evoke a national mood more somber than in 1999 when the dictionary was launched with a first edition reflecting the themes of globalization, growing wealth, optimism and the Internet age.
"The first part of the 21st century has actually been defined by terrorism and war. The dictionary's vocabulary reflects what is going on in society," said U.S. General Editor Anne Soukhanov.
"Really since World War II, we haven't seen such an insistent need to put in new words," she said.
9/11 has two meanings in the dictionary. One denotes the actual hijacked plane attacks on New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. The other use is for a catastrophic attack by terrorists where very large numbers of innocent people are killed or injured.
But in the end, it's another new word that most aptly represents the second edition and the state of the English language. That word is September 10th -- an adjective defined as "so petty, shallow, or outmoded as to be irrelevant."
"There are September 10th and September 11th dictionaries," said Soukhanov. "We're a September 11th dictionary definitely."
"It's a question of respect for the convictions and culture of others. We need to live with these ideas, we need to learn how to do it," Armani was quoted as saying by Italian newspapers on Tuesday.
A small town in northern Italy sparked an uproar this month by fining a woman for venturing outdoors in a burka -- a full length robe covering the head and face which is worn by Muslim women in some parts of the world.
A member of Italy's Northern League, which is part of the ruling coalition, denounced the burka as a "symbol of death" because women involved in a bloody attack on a Russian school had worn the robes.
Critics have often lambasted the Bush administration for what they see as its divisive and unilateralist approach to the war on terror. But recent developments demonstrate that, while the U.S. may not enjoy widespread global support for its efforts in Iraq, it has managed to gain the support of an ally whose importance cannot be overstated. In fact, few have recognized the remarkable level of cooperation the U.S. has been able to establish with Pakistan since 9/11.
This achievement is even more noteworthy given Pakistan's recent history of support for terrorism. With its army and intelligence services largely sympathetic to Islamic extremists, Pakistan emerged as the primary sponsor of the Taliban during the late 1990s; for years, the powerful Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) agency also trained and supported thousands of terrorists who fought against the Indian army in Kashmir. In 1998, according to the recently released 9/11 Commission Report, the State Department's acting counterterrorism coordinator even advised Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to designate Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism.
This major shift was undoubtedly motivated by self-preservation, following a number of assassination attempts on Musharraf by Islamic extremists. But the U.S. has also been able to put strategic pressure on Pakistan with a combination of sticks and carrots: While threatening to make Pakistan an international pariah if it did not join in the fight against terrorism, the Bush administration also offered extensive economic and military aid. For a country mired in poverty and desperate to keep pace with India in their arms race, the prospect of these aid packages has proved highly tantalizing.
President Brodhead: Would you proudly host a Nazi Party or Ku Klux Klan conference in the name of academic freedom? Given your commitment to the First Amendment, would you still allow the meeting to take place behind closed doors with no press allowed? I understand that this is what the Palestine Solidarity Movement conference planners have demanded. As you know, a free and vigorous press is one of our protections against tyranny. What issue cannot bear the cleansing light of scrutiny?The Chesler Wars Come to Duke
But why is Duke giving any intellectual credibility to what is bound to be a hate-fest? Under President Rudenstein, Harvard, which like Duke is also a private institution, resolved that it would not allow any hate-speech conferences. The Harvard Divinity School also returned United Arab Emirate monies from the Sheikh Zayed Foundation no doubt earmarked for such purposes. Perhaps Duke can consider doing this as well. The PSM/ISM are precisely the kinds of groups that European governments, beginning with Germany, have begun to monitor in terms of their terrorism potential. Why is Duke granting them an aura of intellectual respectability?
In my view, the masked and hooded members of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Fatah, and the al-Aqsa's Martyrs Brigade--which the PSM and their allies support--are far more dangerous than the Nazis or the Klan ever were. Their terrorism against civilians, especially in Israel, but also world-wide, is both state-sanctioned and trans-national. Their propaganda against Jews and Israelis is based on doctored footage, photo-opportunity journalism, and sophisticated post-Orwellian lies. The Palestine Solidarity Movement and their allies chant "Death to the Jews," and "Death to America," at what they describe as peace rallies; they characterize the mass murder of civilians as "resistance to oppression;" they preach the destruction of Israel and the murder of all infidels in Arabic--but then, in English, French, and German, claim that they have been misunderstood, that they really meant the opposite of what they said.
Video shops in Gaza are selling a new DVD featuring the recent beheading of an American in Iraq. The gruesome video, priced at NIS 15, is apparently selling like hotcakes.
"When I saw the DVD I started to worry about our future," said Muhammad, a young Gazan father of three who works for the Palestinian Authority. It was so cruel. I couldn't watch. I only looked at the still shots."
Muhammad bought the DVD "out of curiosity," he said. "Of course I did not bring it home to my children. I watched it in my office."
The clip starts with masked men reading the charges and justifying their actions based on Islam. They accuse the American civilian of assisting the "allied occupation forces," place the knife at his head, and start to cut. When done, they hold up the severed head.
"They used a knife which was not sharp... It seems they wanted to kill him slowly to torture him," said another Palestinian who saw the footage.
"The worst thing I remember is the howl of the poor hostage... He was shaking all over. It's hard to imagine how anyone can watch it."
Muhammad said he believes most buy it out of curiosity, but he acknowledged that there is growing anger at the US for its "occupation of Iraq," which many compare to Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. "Those selling the DVD do it for the money. They download it from the Internet for free and then sell it for NIS 15."
Anyone who has actually read the report would know that the 9/11 Commission had plenty to say about the connections between al Qaeda and Iraq, but because much of its findings were beyond the scope of its charter, important details went unstated in public hearings or were buried in the minutiae of the published narrative. Virtually every reporter I have spoken to has failed to answer this basic question satisfactorily: "Have you actually read the report?" The answer is almost always a sheepish "No." Those who have only given it a cursory scan may have missed the fine-print chapter notes where explosive information about names, dates, places, and conversations concerning the Iraq-al Qaeda connection are outlined in chilling detail.
To cite but one of many examples, it states that Saddam Hussein -- wanting to curry favor with other Arab governments wary of Osama bin Laden -- was not responsive to a 1996 request by bin Laden for safe haven in Iraq when the Sudanese government was poised to give him the boot. After bin Laden declared war against the U.S. in 1998, two al Qaeda operatives went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. Later, a delegation of Iraqi officials traveled to Afghanistan and offered to set bin Laden up. Taliban leaders, concerned with the increasing possibility of retaliatory strikes by the U.S., urged bin Laden to go. During heated discussions with other Clinton administration policy-makers about the effect of launching missile strikes on bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan, then NSC Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke worried that bin Laden would "boogie to Baghdad" where he would put his network at Saddam's service and be all the harder to root out, given Saddam's formidable security apparatus.
The Commission further reported that terrorist training camps, now eliminated by the coalition forces of Operation Iraqi Freedom, were set up in Northern Iraq with bin Laden's help. Al Qaeda associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was given safe haven by Saddam Hussein after he fled Afghanistan. It is Zarqawi, a chemical weapons expert, who is believed to be the leading force behind Ansar al-Islam, the terrorist organization bin Laden assisted in founding several years ago and which is carrying out beheadings and suicide bombings in Iraq today.
Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll
Other/Not Sure 11
Sept. 21-22, 2004. 1,000 likely voters nationwide.
Margin of error +/- 3 percentage points.
Associated Press/Ipsos poll
Other/Not Sure 2
Sept. 20-22, 2004. 916 likely voters nationwide.
Margin of error +/- 3.5 percentage points.
CBS News poll
Depends/Don't Know 6
Sept. 20-22, 2004. 931 registered voters nationwide.
Margin of error +/- 3 percentage points.
Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll
Sept. 17-19, 2004. 1,006 registered voters nationwide.
Margin of error +/- 3.1 percentage points.
Zogby America poll
Sept. 17-19, 2004. 1,066 likely voters nationwide.
Margin of error +/- 3.1 percentage points.
Investor's Business Daily/Christian Science Monitor/TIPP poll
Not Sure 11
Sept. 14-18, 2004. 650 likely voters nationwide.
Margin of error +/- 4 percentage points.
Congratulations to Porter Goss for being confirmed last week as the new Director of Central Intelligence. We hope he appreciates that he now has two insurgencies to defeat: the one that the CIA is struggling to help put down in Iraq, and the other inside Langley against the Bush Administration.
We wish we were exaggerating. It's become obvious over the past couple of years that large swaths of the CIA oppose U.S. anti-terror policy, especially toward Iraq. But rather than keep this dispute in-house, the dissenters have taken their objections to the public, albeit usually through calculated and anonymous leaks that are always spun to make the agency look good and the Bush Administration look bad.
Their latest improvised explosive political device blew up yesterday on the front page of the New York Times, in a story proclaiming that the agency had warned back in January 2003 of a possible insurgency in Iraq. This highly selective leak (more on that below) was conveniently timed for two days before the first Presidential debate.