How the Turks shed their blood, fighting the Jihad for Four Hundred years and finally gave up and embraced Islam, and later became the tormentors themselves to carry the bloodied tradition of Jihad into Anatolia (modern Turkey) and the Balkans up to Austria.

-----

The Turks in Pre-Islamic times

Today we read in history that the Ottoman Turks carried the Jihad into Europe. The Turks besieged and sacked Constantinople. To many of us, the Turks before Ataturk reformed Turkey into becoming the Muslim world's first secular republic, were ruthless Jihadis, whose king was the Caliph till 1924, when Ataturk abolished the Caliphate. But we know little of the bloodied struggle that the Turks waged against Islam for 'four hundred years from 650 up to 1050. The first clash of the Turks with the Islamic Jihad took place when the Muslims in their surge through Persia reached the borders of the Sassanid Empire in Khorasan, near Central Asia. In those days the Turks ruled Central Asia. They have been referred to as Turanians by the ancient Persians of Zoroaster's time.

The Turks were so to say a multi-ethnic tribal cluster who were united with the bonds of language. Since ancient times, apart from grazing cattle, the Turks also used to attack settled people in Persia and live off the booty.

______________________________

Tengri is the god of the old Turkic, Mongolian and Altaic religion named Tengriism. The Mongols called him Tengri, (depicted as Blue Sky) was the highest God of Turks and Mongols. The name "Tengri" (Tana-Gra) means "Ruler, Master of the Land"; there might be some connection with the Sumerian word for god Dingir.

In the pre-islamic Turkish worship of celestial objects, lies the usage of Turkish Muslims of the crescent Moon as their symbol. Incidentally, the crescent moon, was borrowed by other non-Arab Muslims from the Turks. We may note that the Arabs never use the crescent moon as their symbol.

__________________________________

The Huns, Bulgars, Ughirs, Seljuks, Qarluqs were some of the different tribes that made up the vast Turkish nation. Of these the Huns and the Bulgars embraced Christianity and the rest of the Turkish clans embraced Islam. Before embracing Islam or Christianity, in the 3rd and 4th centuries the Turks (Huns, also called White Huns) had attacked the Roman empire, the Sassanid and Achaemenian empires in Persia and had also invaded India. They were a warlike race, who would not easily be subjugated and led a nomadic life. They were hardy tribal race who had strains of Caucasoid and Mongoloid ancestry.

The pre-Islamic religion of the Turks was centered around their celestial god named Tengri (or Tanri)

Tengri is the god of the old Turkic, Mongolian and Altaic religion named Tengriism. The Mongols called him Tengri, (depicted as Blue Sky) was the highest God of Turks and Mongols. The name "Tengri" -(Tana-Gra) means "Ruler, Master of the Land"; there might be some connection with the Sumerian word for god Dingir.

In the pre-islamic Turkish worship of celestial objects lies the usage of Turkish Muslims of the crescent Moon as their symbol. Incidentally, the crescent moon, was borrowed by other Muslims from the Turks. We may note that the Arabs never use the crescent moon as their symbol.

The core beings in Tengriism are Sky-Father (Tengri/Tenger Etseg) and Mother Earth (Eje/Gazar Eej). In history, Chinggis Khan (Gengis Khan), the unifier of the Mongolian nation, based his power on a mandate from Tengri himself, and began all his declarations with the words "by the will of Eternal Blue Heaven."

The symbols of Tengri were a cross (betraying Christian influences), the skies and the sun. It is often confused with a sun-worshipping religion, but the sun is merely a symbol of Tengri.

______________________________

Deep in history neither the Mongols nor the Turks were Muslims, but in fact had waged a bloodied struggle against Islam. The Turks and Mongols were neighbors and had mixed ancestry since antiquity. Both held Central Asia between them when the Arab Muslim invaders appeared on the scene, after over-running the Persian Sassanid Empire in the year 651. Ironically the Turks had to struggle with Islam which came to them through the medium of the Islamized Persians who had been newly converted to Islam at the point of the sword by the Arabs.

__________________________________

In modern Turkish, the word "Tanri" is used as the generic word for "god", and is also often used today by practicing Muslims to refer to their God in Turkish as an alternative to the word "Allah", the - originally Arabic - Islamic word for "God".

Khan is pre-Islamic title

Khan is a typical Turkish royal title and is, by default today, considered to be a Muslim name. But Genghis Khan and Hulagu Khan were not Muslims, they were in fact were inveterate enemies of the Muslims. They laid waste a large swathe of the Islamic crescent in the 13th century, till their descendants were ultimately defeated by the Muslims and were forced to convert to Islam. After this conversion, till today we have come to believe that the name Khan is a Muslim name and that the Turks and the Mughals (Mongols) have always been Muslims.

Deep in history neither the Mongols nor the Turks were Muslims, and had waged a bloodied struggle against Islam before their forcible conversion. The Turks and Mongols were neighbors and had mixed ancestry since antiquity. Both held Central Asia between them when the Arab Muslim invaders appeared on the scene, after over-running the Persian Sassanid Empire in the year 651.

The Defeat of Sassanid Persia, opened up the Turkish domains of Central Asia to the Jihadis

After clearing these pockets of Persian resistance, the Arabs made the main Persian town of Merv the target of attack. Merv was the capital  of Khurasan and here the last Sassanid king Yazdgard had sought refuge with his courtiers who had being fleeing before the advancing Arab Muslims, since the Arab invasion of Persia in 637 after the disastrous battle of Qadisiyyah. The Persian army was now in tatters and in no position to put up any effective resistance to the invading Arabs. On hearing of the Muslim advance, Yazdgard left for Balkh.  No resistance was offered at Merv, and the Muslims occupied the capital of Khurasan without lifting their swords.

______________________________

When the Arabs first invaded Turkish lands, it was reported to the Arab commander Ahnaf that the practice with the Turks was that the war commenced at dawn and before the war could start three heralds  blew bugles and then the Turkish force marched to the battle.  To subvert the Turks, before the night of the war, Ahnaf hid himself in a safe place outside the Turkish camp. As soon as the Turkish herald came  out of the Turkish camp to blow the bugle, Ahnaf overpowered him and killed the Turk with his sword. When the  second herald came he met the same fate. The third herald also met the same fate. So on that day the bugles  did not blow for the Turkish army.

When the bugles did not blow the Khan of Farghana came out of the  camp to see what had happened to the heralds. When he saw that all of them were dead he regarded  this as a bad omen. At the spur of the moment he decided that the Turks should not involve themselves  with the Muslims. He ordered his force to withdraw and march back to Farghana.

This is how the Arab Muslims deceived the Turks into retreating. The Islamic Jihad had drawn the first Turkish blood thru subterfuge.

__________________________________

The Arab commander Ahnaf stayed at Merv for some time to reorganize the administration and to await further reinforcements  from Kufa. In the meantime the Persian forces gathered in considerable strength at Balkh. Yazdgard  sought aid from the neighboring Turkish state Farghana and the Khan of Farghana personally led a Turkish  contingent to Balkh.

Having received reinforcements, Ahnaf led the Muslim forces to Balkh. The Muslims had experience of battling  with the Persians but they had little experience of war with the Turks. Ahnaf wanted to avoid war with  the Turks, and in this connection he thought of devious ways whereby the Turks should abandon the cause of  Yazdgard.

So when the Arab Muslims first invaded Turkish lands, the Muslims decided to use subterfuge. It was reported to the Arab commander Ahnaf that the practice with the Turks was that the war commenced at dawn and before the war could start three heralds  blew bugles and then the Turkish force marched to the battle.  To subvert the Turks, before the night of the war, Ahnaf hid himself in a safe place outside the Turkish camp. As soon as the Turkish herald came  out of the Turkish camp to blow the bugle, Ahnaf overpowered him and killed the Turk with his sword. When the  second herald came he met the same fate. The third herald also met the same fate. So on that day the bugles  did not blow for the Turkish army.

When the bugles did not blow the Khan of Farghana came out of the  camp to see what had happened to the heralds. When he saw that all of them were dead he regarded  this as a bad omen. At the spur of the moment he decided that the Turks should not involve themselves  with the Muslims. He ordered his force to withdraw and march back to Farghana.  This is how the Arab Muslims deceived the Turks into retreating. The Islamic Jihad had drawn the first Turkish blood thru subterfuge.

______________________________

In the space of 650-1050 AD a number of events of importance transpired in Central Asia. These four hundred years were the fiercest in the Turkish struggle against the Islamic Jihad. The next four hundred years were to see the gradual transformation of the pagan Turks into Muslims. The Turks shed their blood fighting the Jihad for four hundred years but finally gave up and embraced Islam, to later become Jihadis themselves to carry the bloodied tradition of aggression and forcible conversion into Anatolia (modern Turkey) and through the Balkans up to Austria and Poland.

__________________________________

The next three hundred years witnessed the untold story of the Turkish resistance to Islam. Ironically the Turks had to struggle with Islam which came to them through the medium of the Muslim Persians who had been newly converted to Islam at the point of the sword by the Arabs.

The Persian converts to Islam overthrow the Arab Umayyad Caliphs and replace them with the Persianized Abbasid Caliphs

In the space of 650-1050 AD a numbers of events of importance transpired in Central Asia. These four hundred years were the fiercest in the Turkish struggle against the Jihad. The next four hundred years were to see the gradual transformation of the pagan Turks into Muslims. The Turks shed their blood fighting the Jihad for four hundred years and finally gave up and embraced Islam, to later become the tormentors themselves to carry the bloodied tradition of Jihad into Anatolia (modern Turkey) and Balkans up to Austria and Poland.

In the year 750, an important event that transformed Central Asia. This event was the overthrow of the Umayyads Caliphate and its replacement by the Abbasid Caliphate. While Umayyads of Damascus were Arabs who had descended from Abu Sufyan the Chieftain of Mecca at the time of Mohammed. The newly converted Zoroastrian Persians wanted to regain their pre-eminent power in Persia. They organized themselves and marched against the Umayyad army. The two armies met at a place called Zab. Here the Persian Abbasids defeated the Arab Umayyads and established a new caliphate near Ctesiphon the site of the ancient capital of the Sassanid Persians. They named this city Baghdad which was to be the capital of the Abbasids from 750 up to its sack by the Mongols in 1258.

A leading commander of the Abbasid army was a Zoroastrian convert to Islam named Behzadan, who had assumed the name Abu Muslim. He played a leading role in the war and deposed the Umayyad caliph, and placed the Persianized Abbasids as Caliphs and as the head of the Muslim world. With this revolution the leadership of the Muslim world had passed from Arab hands into Persian hands, a leadership which they had lost a century earlier, when the Arabs had destroyed the Sassanid Persian empire.

An important change now was that the Persians who as Zoroastrians a century earlier were victims of Islam had now embraced Islam and had become the new vanguard of the bloodied creed of Islam. Their victims were to be the Turks of Central Asia.

Abu Muslim a Zoroastrian Persian convert to Islam, attacked and Islamized the Turks

Shortly after victory at the battle of Zab, and the establishment of the Abbasid Caliphate at Baghdad, Abu Muslim was commissioned to conduct a Jihad in Central Asia to exterminate the Kaffirs once and for all. It was a great low point for the Western branch of the Blue Turks. Their great Khan Su'lu who was a bulwark against the Moslems and the Chinese in the wars of 720 and 723, was assassinated by the Arabs. The pagan Turkic rulers of Samarqand and Bokhara came under a heavy assault from the ghazis after the fall of Su'lu when the Arabs with 300 giant trebuchets stormed the cities and forcibly imposed Islam with the destruction of the pagan places of worship.

Defeat of the Chinese at the Battle of the Talas River with the invading Muslims sealed the fate of the Turkish resistance to Islam

Archaeological evidence shows that these Turkic cities were cosmopolitan with Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism and the Tengri cults of the Altaics were the various creeds that were practiced. The Arabs under Abu Muslim savagely crushed, the last attempt made by the populations of Samarqand and Bokhara to rid themselves of the murderous Muslim Ghazis. Abu Muslim sent his victorious commander of these wars, Ziyad ibn Salih, with a band of 40000 ghazis, to wage a Jihad on the Chinese. The Arab army marched from the south towards Talas. The Chinese general Kao (of Korean origin), decided to resist the Muslim invasion and marched towards Aulie-Ata on the Talas river with 100,000 Chinese troops in cavalry and infantry divisions.

In the Battle of the Talas river, the Betrayal of the Qarluq Turks led to the defeat of the Chinese at Arab hands

On July 10th 751 AD the Arab and Chinese armies took to the field in Aulie-Ata on the backs of the Talas river. The Chinese cavalry seemed to initially overwhelm the Arab cavalry, but the Arabs had worked out a deal with one of the many Turkish contingents of the Chinese army viz., the Qarluq Turks, by promising them wealth and freedom in return for embracing Islam and betraying their Chinese masters. The Qarluqs who held a grudge against the Chinese for having reduced them to vassalage, viewed this as an opportunity to throw off the Chinese yoke by using the Arabs, and had planned to later throwing off the Arab yoke as well and regaining their freedom from both the Chinese and the Arabs. The Qarluq Turks later played the main role in converting other Turkish tribes notably the Seljuk Turks to Islam.

At the battle of the Talas river where the Arab and the Chinese armies clashed, the Qarluqs who were a part of the Chinese army, opened a breach in their own ranks and allowed the Arabs to ford the river and helped them to encircle a part of the Chinese infantry butchering it to the last man.

______________________________

It was Mustapha Kemal Pasha (fondly called Ataturk ' father of the Turks) who saw beyond Islam and wanted to build for the Turks a future bereft of Islam. He based his vision on three precepts:

Modernization by abolishing the Caliphate
Westernizing by de-islamizing Turkey
Retuning to Turkish roots by taking on ethnic Turkish names in place of Arabic Islamic names.

__________________________________

The Qarluq archers then surrounded their paymaster the general of the Chinese army Kao and treacherously shot him down. Now the Arabs followed their heinous practice of sticking the severed head of an enemy and parading it before the enemy army. The Chinese not being used to such grisly war tactics, fell into confusion and disarray, not knowing who had betrayed them, and their General Kao. They broke ranks and fell back into confusion, shaking the Chinese center, which was rapidly assaulted by the Arab heavy cavalry and destroyed. Thus due to Muslim subterfuge and savagery the infallible Chinese war machine gave way under combined assault of the Arabs and the traitor Qarluqs, and they faced a heavy rout. From behind, the treacherous Qarluqs fell upon the Chinese baggage trains and supplies carrying away all they could and receded back into the steppe.

The Arabs rounded up tens of thousands of Chinese and their non-Qarluq Turk allies and took them to Samarqand from where Abu Muslim sent them to Baghdad and Damascus to be sold as slaves, each worth a dirham. One Chinese survivor mentions being kept as cattle in the Arab prison camps. Abu Muslim and Ziyad made huge financial gains out of this slave trade and used it to pay their armies. More importantly the Arabs forced the Turk and Chinese prisoners to teach them the art of making siege trains and catapult machines, which the Islamized Turks were to use successfully in their attacks on the Byzantine cities.

The Qarluq Turks aimed at playing the Chinese and the Muslims against each other to gain their own independence

The Qarluq Turks wanted independence from the Chinese so they made a pretence of embracing Islam to obtain Arab support to defeat the Chinese. The Qarluqs had planned to later throw off the Arab yoke as well by repudiating Islam and regaining their freedom from both the Chinese and the Arabs. But little did the Qarluqs realize that in working out a deal with the Arabs, while they would succeed in throwing off the Chinese yoke, they would have to bring themselves into the fold of Islam, from which there was no escape! The Qarluqs were forced to remain Muslim and whenever any of them reneged their Islamic faith, they were put to death while the luckier among them were enslaved by the Arabs and Persian Muslims.

The later history of the Qarluqs was as Muslims who resigned themselves to remaining as satellites of the Arabs after having thrown off the Chinese yoke and with it also the only possibility of liberating themselves from the grip of Islam. It was this devious conversion of the Quarluqs that triggered the conversion of the greater Turkish nation to Islam in the next three centuries from 750 to 1050.

The Turks who had zealously retained their freedom from their neighbors the Chinese, and the Zoroastrian Persians for more than a millennium, finally began succumbing to Islam due to a tactical pretense of the Qarluqs of embracing Islam, for securing Arabs support and throwing off Chinese suzerainty. A deal that proved costly for Turkish independence that was now permanently enslaved into the prison of Islam. The Turks henceforth would remain satellites of the Arabs, a position they sought to reverse, by themselves becoming more aggressive champions of Islam, and reducing their Arabs masters to vassalage status when they established their Seljuk and later Uthman (Ottoman) dynasties.

Turkish Resistance to Islam

But before they would finally resign to their fate to being Muslims the Turks waged a bloodied war against the Muslim incursion of their homeland in Central Asia. After the Battle of the Talas river, the Arabs captured many of the non-Qarluq Turks who were allies of the Chinese and deported them as salves to Baghdad. They are reported to have totaled up to seventy thousand. Not only were these enslaved Turks were forced to become Muslims, but enslavement was the tactic used by the Islamized Turks to convert the non-Muslim Turks to Islam.

The Conversion of the Seljuk Turks to Islam

The next Turkish clan to be converted to Islam was the Seljuks. They were a proud imperial clan among the Turks, and after the conversion of the Qarluqs to Islam, it was the Seljuks who held the banner of Turkish resistance to Islam. The Seljuks remained unsubdued for another century and half. But the Arabs, Persian and Islamized Turks mounted many bloodied campaigns against them and other non-Muslim Turks who were allied to the Seljuks. In this series of battles the fortunes fluctuated from one side to the other, at times the Muslims were victorious and at others the Turks emerged victorious.

Tactics used by the Muslims to convert the Turks to Islam

In this unwritten chapter of the Turkish resistance to Islam, the Muslims (who in this case were mainly the Zoroastrian Persian converts to Islam), devised new tactics and subterfuge to enslave a proud and fiercely independent people which characterized the Turkish clan. In this battle the Turks did not lack in bravery, as they were born warriors and spent a large part of their lives on horseback. But whenever the non-Muslim Turks were victorious, they destroyed the Muslim camps, slaughtered their armies, destroyed their cities, and torched their fields, but it did not cross their minds, to enforce any religion on the defeated Muslims. Those of the Muslims that the Turks set free, either went back to the Muslim controlled cities, or stayed on in the Turkish areas and attempted to spread Islam. A mindset that was totally absent among the non-Muslim Turks. (It was only when the Christians of Europe liberated Muslim lands, did they attempt to re-convert the Muslims to Christianity.) But the pre-Islamic Turks knew of no such tactic and they made no attempt to roll back the tide of Islam when they were victorious over the Muslims.

So while the Christens of Europe succeeded in turning back the tide of Islam in the middle ages, the Turks failed to resist Islam. Herein lies an important factor in defeating Islam, forcing the reconversion of the defeated Muslims out of Islam. If the defeated Muslims are allowed to retain their faith (which is nothing but a cult of death and murder), they venom of Islam will become powerful once again to overwhelm the non-Muslim victors and ultimately defeat them. So whenever the Muslims are defeated and subjugated they need to be made to give up Islam, at the pain of death if necessary. But Islam has to be wiped out of peoples minds if the victory over Islam has to be consolidated and made permanent. As long as a person remains a Muslim, he/she remains an ever present danger to any non-Islamic (civilized) way of life.

Muslims held Turkish princes as captives to be brought up as Muslims

In their struggle with the pre-Islamic Turks the tactic of the Muslims was to use every victory to press Islam on the defeated Turks. At every negotiation with the Turks, when the Turks faced a defeat, the Muslims would ask for custody of the princes and princesses of the Turkish royal family on the excuse of holding them as a guarantee that the Turks would keep their word given during the negotiations. These royal captives would be brought up in the Islamic tradition and their minds jaundiced in favor of Islam. In many cases when their Muslim captors were satisfied that the royal captives had mentally accepted Islam, the Shahada (declaration of the acceptance of Islam) was pronounced to them, and they were released to return to their kingdoms, whenever they had to ascend the throne in their clans and tribes.

______________________________

Most important of all, Ataturk visualized that in future there could be folks like Abdullah Gul and Erdogan who might want to undo the revolutionary secular reforms initiated by Ataturk and roll back Turkey into the Islamic age. To prevent this, he made the Turkish military the custodian of secular traditions. The Turkish military has intervened to upset any Islamist take of Turkey on many occasions during the last ninety years. It is quite possible the military will be called upon to take the reins of power once again, especially with the impending partition of Iraq and the coming of Kurdistan as an independent country with its destabilizing effects on Turkey's Kurds and Erdogan taking advantage of this scenario to sideline the military to seize more power for himself and his Islamist party.

__________________________________

With a Muslim at the helm in a non-Muslim Turkish clan, the conversion of the rest of the clan to Islam was only a matter of time. This was one of the tactics used by the Muslims to infiltrate Islam into the Turkish nation. By the middle of the eleventh century, most of the Turks had embraced Islam, and thenceforth it was they who became the vanguard of the Jihad to carry the bloodied trial of Islam into Anatolia and the Balkans. It was these Islamized Seljuk Turks who kept up a constant pressure on the Byzantine Empire inflicting on the Byzantines a string of defeats starting from the Battle of Manzikert in 1071 in Eastern Anantolia. It was these steady attacks and migration of the Seljuk Turks into Anatolia which gave the present Turkish character to Anatolia making it the Turkey of today.

The Seljuk (and later the Ottoman) Turks also carried with them the tradition of taking child hostages and bringing them up as Muslims, a tactic of which they had earlier been victims at the hands of the Arab and Persian Muslims. This led to the institution of the Turkish Jannisaries The Jannisaries (Mercenaries from Jan = Life and Nisar = given away. The Muslims will have you believe that Janisarry comes from Yeni = new and Chery = soldier, but this is an eyewash meant to hide Muslim atrocities on non-Muslims) were Christian children taken captive by the Turks when they invaded Anatolia and the Balkans. The Jannisaries is a practice derived by the Turks from the Arab and Persian Muslims tactics used against them (the Turks) during their pre-Islamic days.

But the irony of history is that the Islamization of the Turks and the Mongols also started their migration from the traditional homelands in the Steppes of Central Asia into Anatolia and onwards in the Balkans. Today the word Turk is not mainly identified with the Turkic peoples of Central Asia who make up the Kazakh, Uzbek, Khirgiz and Tajik people (all of whom were called the Turanians in ancient times). Today the word Turk implies an inhabitant of Anatolia which is called Turkey. But in ancient times the inhabitants of Anatolia were not the Turks, they were Hittites (and Indo-European people) who later mingled with the Greek speaking inhabitants who built the Hellenized kingdoms of Sardis and Troy.

Hulagu's invasion - The Turko-Mongol attack on Muslim Iran and Middle East was similar to the Crusades, in that it was a Non-Muslim Counterattack on Islam

Returning to pre-Islamic Central Asia, we need to bring attention to another curious fact that today not many historians have pointed out that the subterfuge, savage cruelty and other foul tactics which the Muslims used to convert the Turks to Islam, had led to a gradual accumulation of bitterness and a desire for revenge against the Muslims in the Turks and their related clans the Mongols.

Over the centuries many Persian Zoroastrians, the Persian Nestorian Christians, the Turks, Chinese and the Mongols had nursed within themselves a grievance against the Muslims expansion into Persia and Central Asia. It is this accumulation of grievances that led to the burst of the Mongol attack on Islamdom from 1200 that culminated in the sack and slaughter of Baghdad in 1258 under Hulagu Khan who was egged on to this path by his Nestorian Persian Christian wife.

Historians have failed to interpret the attack of the Mongols on Muslim Persia, and the Middle East as the Turko-Mongol counterattack on Islam; as were the Crusades, a Christian counterattack against Islam in the 11th century, We shall examine this in detail in the chapter on the Mongol resistance to Islam. Suffice it to note here that Hulagu's attack on Islamdom was a collective expression of resistance to Islam from the pre-Islamic Persians who had settled in China and Mongolia, and the Turks who had been waging a struggle against Islam in the 8th to the 10th centuries. It was a result of historical wrongs committed by the Arab Muslims on the Zoroastrian Persians, and by the Arab Muslims along with the Islamized Persians on the Turks, and in turn, by the Arabs with the Islamized Persians and the Islamized Turks on non-Islamic Turks and Mongols and Chinese.

Ataturk, the Visionary

It Mustapha Kemal Pasha (fondly called Ataturk 'father of the Turks) who saw beyond Islam and wanted to build for the Turks a future bereft of Islam. He based his vision on three precepts:

Modernization of Turkey by abolishing the Caliphate
Westernizing by de-islamizing Turkey
Retuning to Turkish roots by taking on ethnic Turkish names in place of Arabic Islamic names

Ataturk's first and revolutionary measure was to abolish the Caliphate. Thus with one stroke he dealt two blows to Islamic orthodoxy. With the Caliphate abolished by a Turkish nationalist military commander, Turkey was no longer the focus of the Islamic world. He severed Turkey's most critical link with the Islamic world. Atatirk supplemented this with the abolition of the Arabic script and replaced it with the Latin script. He abolished the Chador (for ladies ) and Fez for men (Islamic cap with a tuft), and replaced it with Western dress. Women were to don Western skirts, while men were to be in Western three piece suits.

Ataturk banned the growing of beards by men and the wearing of even scarves by women. He outlawed the issuing of the Muezzins call for prayer and made this a private affair, with even the Muslim prayer leaders, priests and preachers having to be beardless and don Western dress!. He encouraged the next generation of Turks to take on ethnic pre-Islamic Turkish names like Bulent Ecevit, Turgut Ozal, Mesut Yilmaz, Necmettin Erbakan and Tansu Ciller, etc.

Most important of all, Ataturk visualized that in future there could be folks like Abdullah Gul and Erdogan who might want to undo the revolutionary secular reforms initiated by Ataturk and roll back Turkey into the Islamic age. To prevent this, he made the Turkish military the custodian of secular traditions. During the last ninety years the Turkish military has intervened to upset any Islamist take of Turkey on many occasions. It is quite possible the military will be called upon to take the reins of power once again, especially with the impending partition of Iraq and the formation of Iraqi Kurdistan as an independent country with its destabilizing effects on Turkey's Kurds and Erdogan taking advantage of this scenario to sideline the military to seize more power for himself and his Islamist party.

______________________________________

Select Bibliography

The Mummy, Funeral Rites & Customs in Ancient Egypt, by Ernest A. Wallis Budge, reprint of 1893 edition by Senate Studio Editions 1995

The Twilight of Ancient Egypt, First Millennium B.C.E., by Karol Mysliwiec, translated by David Lorton, Cornell University Press2000

Egypt in The Age of Cleopatra, by Michel Chauveau, translated by David Lorton, Cornell University Press, 2000

Women in Ancient Egypt, by Gay Robins, Harvard University Press, 1996

Women and Society in Greek and Roman Egypt: A Source Book by Jane Rowlandson, Cambridge University Press, 1998

The Chronicle of John Coptic Bishop of Nikiu (circa 690 A.D.), translated by Robert Henry Charles, reprint from 1916 edition, APA-Philo Press Amsterdam, Holland

The Vanished Library, A Wonder of The Ancient World, by Luciano Canfora, University of California Press

The Story of The Church of Egypt, Volumes I and II, by Edith L. Butcher, reprint of 1897 edition by AMS Press Inc, New York, N.Y 1975

Coptic Egypt, by Murad Kamil, Le Scribe Egyptien, 1968

Traditional Egyptian Christianity, A History of the Coptic Church, by Theodore. Hall Patrick, Fisher Park Press, 1999

Muslim Extremism in Egypt, The Prophet and the Pharaoh, by Gilles Kepel, University of California Press 1993

Ancient Egyptian Culture, published by Chartwell Books, Edison, N.J. 1998.

Samson Blinded: A Machiavellian Perspective on the Middle East Conflict, by Obadiah Shoher

Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries (Hardcover) by Paul Fregosi

The Sword of the Prophet: History, Theology, Impact on the World by Srdja Trifkovic

Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith by Robert Spencer

Studies in Muslim Apocalyptic (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam) by David Cook

Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq

Onward Muslim Soldiers by Robert Spencer

Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye'Or

Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide by Bat Yeor

What the Koran Really Says: Language, Text, and Commentary by Ibn Warraq

Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad by Mark A. Gabriel, Mark A. Gabriel

A Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas F. Madden

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer

The Great Divide: The failure of Islam and the Triumph of the West by Marvin Olasky

The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims by Robert Spencer

Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith by Robert Spencer, David Pryce-Jones

The Koran (Penguin Classics) by N. J. Dawood

Don't Keep me Silent! One Woman's Escape from the Chains of Islam by Mina Nevisa

Christianity And Islam: The Final Clash by Robert Livingston

Holiest Wars : Islamic Mahdis, Their Jihads, and Osama bin Laden by Timothy R. Furnish

The Last Trumpet: A Comparative Study in Christian-Islamic Eschatology by Samuel, Ph.D. Shahid

Unleashing the beast: How a fanatical islamic dictator will form a ten-nation coalition and terrorize the world for forty-two months by Perry Stone

Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature (Religion and Politics) by David Cook

Islam and the Jews: The Unfinished Battle by Mark A., Ph.D. Gabriel

The Challenge of Islam to Christians by David Pawson

The Prophetic Fall of the Islamic Regime by Glenn Miller, Roger Loomis

Prophet of Doom : Islam's Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad's Own Words by Craig Winn

The False Prophet by Ellis H. Skolfield

The Approach of Armageddon: An Islamic Perspective by Muhammad Hisham Kabbani

The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America, and Politics Without God by George Weigel

Infiltration : How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington by Paul Sperry

Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left by David Horowitz

Unveiling Islam : An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs by Ergun Mehmet Caner

Perfect Soldiers : The Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry McDermott

Islam Revealed A Christian Arab's View Of Islam by Anis Shorrosh

Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out by Ibn Warraq

The Origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book by Ibn Warraq

The program enjoys the support of the municipality and the police, and is headed by Kiryat Gat's welfare representative, who goes to schools to warn girls of the "exploitative Arabs."

The program uses a video entitled "Sleeping with the Enemy," which features a local police officer and a woman from the Anti-Assimilation Department, a wing of the religious organization Yad L'ahim, which works to prevent Jewish girls from dating Muslim men.

What if I were to tell you that there never was, in the history of man, a country known as “Palestine”?  What if I were to tell you that the closest we can come is what the Ancient Romans used to call the Holy Lands which was Caesarea Palestinia?

What if I were to tell you that Yasir Arafat was in fact an Egyptian who invented modern notions of “Palestine”because he needed to invent a country that had been wronged by the Jews?  What if I were to tell you that Yasir became President of a country he made up as a propaganda stunt who we now accept as legitimate so that we can be seen to be “fair”.

What if I were to tell you that the land of modern Israel was a wasteland with a few nomadic Arabs before the Jews began to immigrate to their ancestral lands?  Israel is about 1% of the Middle East and it was indeed a wasteland before the Jews turned it into the prosperous thriving land it is today.

What if I were to remind you that the United Nations created the land of Israel after World War II when Europe was done killing some six million Jews?  After all, the conscience of the world was pretty raw in those days, so the nations of the world decided that the Jews could have their homeland back.

What if I were to tell you that a bunch of Jews settled the land, improved it, built farms and homes and industries on it and had to defend it time and time again from massive combined attacks by their Islamic Neighbors? What if the Jews were attacked by massive invasions not once but many times and prevailed each time against astronomical odds. 

What if I were to tell you that the Arabs became envious of what the Jews did with a worthless scrap of wilderness and suddenly flooded the area themselves to try and get a piece of the pie from the Jews?

What if I were to tell you that the Arabs want this land because the Koran teaches them that once a land has “belonged” to Islam that it can never be possessed by an infidel?  Any person who does not follow Islam is an unbeliever and essentially a waste of skin that is subject to being killed by a Muslim at his whim.  The land was a wilderness before the Jews migrated back but it was just the idea that Jews could make the land bloom that so infuriated the Arabs.

What if I were to tell you that “Tolerance” is a western, Jewish / Christian value and not, defiantly not, an Arab/ Islamic one?  It’s not just the Jews with whom the Moslems can’t get along .  They can’t get along with any of their neighbors from India to the Jews, to the Americans, to the Buddhists, to anyone who does not believe exactly as they do.  They can’t even get along with themselves. The Shiites hate the Sunni and everyone seems to hate the Kurds.

What if I was to tell you that “Palestinian” children were taught from earliest schooling that Jews and Christians were little more than crafty monkeys and were essentially sub human?  What if this “education” has been going on for decades?  Would it help you to comprehend how one human being can get in a giant bull dozer and deliberately drive over other human beings?  As a good, educated, sophisticated product of our politically correct school systems would you defend the “Palestinian” right to continue to teach kids that Jews and Christians are sub human or are you ready to disregard political correctness and call this indoctrination into hate and Child Abuse.  Have you the courage to impose your values onto another culture and proclaim what these schools are doing to be wrong?

Is it possible that we have a conflict where one side is right and the other wrong?  Can we be educated and sophisticated and conclude that one party to this conflict is so full of hate that their perspective on the conflict is not worth considering?  What kind of people wire their women and children to explode in the hope of killing some infidels? Is the price of diversity, tolerance, global citizenship the ability to celebrate blowing up autistic children in the marketplace, a cowardly craven disregard for our own humanity?

Is it possible that after all the “Aid to Palestine” that the money has largely been stolen by its “leaders” or spent on weapons; while it could have been spent on roads, houses, schools, nurses, I pods and lollypops?  After decades of aid can anyone understand why anyone gives them so much as a dime when the “Palestinian” population continue to live in a dung heap of their “leaders” making?  Why does the USA give any aid to a non country who acts this way?

Is it possible that Israel has given away more land than the present Israeli state by returning to its attackers the land that the invaders lost in there many failed sneak attacks on Israel?

If we had Mexicans exploding at shopping malls or running over people with bulldozers on Main Street what do you think the USA would do to the perpetrators of this mindless violence?  Do you think we would try to understand them, negotiate with them, and treat a gang of thugs with the respect due a legitimate nation or a and head of state?

How is it possible that a rational thinking person must believe that the “Palestinians” must have some valid point of view and a valid grievance in continuing this mindless violence all these decades in order to be “Progressive, Worldly, Educated, Sophisticated, Fair Minded,” and all the other attributes that we would like to think we are: instead of a sap, a chump, a babe in the woods, a mark, or simply a fool?

The Muslims blow up priceless Buddha statues, they have violent shoot outs in the Church of the Nativity, they destroy the artifacts of other religions, they desecrate Joseph’s tomb and now they claim that Jerusalem was never Jewish!  They claim the temple mount never had a Jewish presence on it!  What manor of adults are we if we are so morally degenerate that we can’t label the nonsense the Muslims spout as nonsense and hold them to account for it?  We are not obligated to believe any obvious falsehoods to be tolerant but we are obligated to act on the truth of the matter to be responsible and accountable human beings.

I don’t see a valid claim from the Muslims on the Holy Land.  The fact is that the map of Mideast counties was largely drawn up by colonial Europeans in general and the British Empire in particular.  The Jews have been dispersed from their ancestral home in the holy land three times and over thousands of years have held fast to the land of their origin and have created a state in 1948 against UNBELIEVABLE odds.  The Jews have earned the right to that land over and over again and the Muslims need to get a life, forswear violence, and make peace with their neighbors.  How anyone can champion the Palestinian cause is a mystery to me.

And that's why you end up with people talking about the "muslim smear".

When I thumbed through the morning newspaper the other day and came across a report alleging that the Dept. of Justice is entertaining the idea of "racial profiling", I thought I plucked up the "ONION" Newspaper by mistake.

The report noted that the government is tinkering with new guidelines to allow the FBI to investigate Americans without any "evidence" of wrongdoing - allowing the agents instead - to rely solely on a "profile" that would put the spotlight on Muslims, Arabs and other racial and ethic groups.

Currently, agents of Law Enforcement require a specific reason - or proof that a law has been broken - in order to investigate U.S. Citizens and legal residents.

The new policy would permit the FBI to open preliminary terrorism investigations after they have sifted through public records and available intelligence and managed to sketch a profile of traits from the crumbs - that when taken as a whole - may be deemed suspicious and/or worthy of pursuing.

Sounds like the kind of sinister plot Adolf Hitler might hatch up in a bold-faced effort to secure the destiny of his perfect Aryan Race, don't 'ya think?

Heil George W. Bush!

From the get-go - no matter how you fathom it - the wild scheme is un-American.

We have only to recite the inscription on the base of the Statue of Liberty to get our bearings in this regard:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Are we to amend that to read,

"Only if your a**ses are Lily white and foreign free?"

Notwithstanding, the whole "idea" flies in the face of the U.S. Constitution.

Does the Bush administration intend to toss the whole concept of "Due process of Law" out the window, too?

In that event, the presumption of innocence would be lost.

Golly, the Founding Fathers of this country must be turning over in their graves!

But, the Government's jaundiced view of things gets worse.

Factors that could make someone the subject of an investigation include travel to regions of the world known for terrorist activity and/or where there is access to weapons or military training.

In addition, a person's race or ethnicity would be a key factor in the decision to open up a clandestine investigation, too.

In fact, every citizen will be suspect under the new guidelines.

Whoa Nellie!

Are they daft?

The long and short of it?

I foresee a "controlled" society where the Nation's peoples - no matter their race, color, or creed - are not free by any stretch of the imagination.

Indeed - if any of the aforementioned guidelines are implemented - the U.S. may end up sliding down a slippery slope and along a dark and trecherous path to become a full-fledged fascist regime.

At that juncture - fear, suspicion, and uncertainty - will be rife around the Nation.

And, Americans will become the most-hated citizens of the world.

You can count on that, believe me.

If anything, I surmise terrorist threats will increase!

I also expect that there will be an uprising within unstable U.S. borders - and that just maybe - there may be an overthrow of the government, too.

One has only to look to the U.S. Constitution to understand why.

"We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Understandably - once there is a loss of "domestic tranquility" and irreparable harm to the "general welfare" of the people - the citizenry will pay heed to the prophetic third sentence of the remarkable - "Declaration of Independence" - and demand a call to action.

"That to secure these rights [to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness], governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

As Edward Abbey once said,

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country from his Government."

Amen!

Qassam attacks are nothing doing longer dope- ethical self is getting harder in consideration of tide over golf links respecting the seasonally quite a few quicksilver by what mode fewer Israeli announcement outlets plight dactylonomy she.

Upon which the Israeli signaling yourselves set going treating Jupiter attacks in the wind Israeli citizens for voting right slenderness, how jug we reckon the inactivity with regard to the state until pass themselves soberly?

women are too nice

By Ralph Dobrin

In past generations the most libellous statements against Jews were often made by other Jews who had left the fold, and were eager to demonstrate their loyalty to their new-found identities and faith. There was always a number (probably a tiny minority) who deeply hated their erstwhile Jewish identity because it had been the reason for the discrimination they had suffered and hence the source of their misery. But nowadays, Jews aren’t discriminated against like they were in previous centuries, so one would think that there is no longer such a pressing impetus for Jewish self-hate or the need to vociferously disclaim their ethnic or religious roots like in the past.

Yet there are many Jews in the world, as well as in Israel, who make inflammatory accusations against Israel or instigate highly damaging actions. I’m not talking about criticism of actual procedures like house demolitions, or detainment of arrested Arab youngsters together with adults – controversial actions that are dismaying to any decent person, but which might well be understood in the light of the ongoing terror war waged against Israel. No, I mean outright factual fabrications and hostile actions instigated by Jews in various parts of the world, and even in Israel itself. I’m also referring to criticism of actual procedures without considering what prompted them.

But don’t get me wrong. I’m all in favor of constructive criticism, especially when it’s based on fact. I think that everyone should be able to express themselves about whatever they think is a wrongness, no matter who they are or where they live, as long as they know what they are talking about. Regarding Israel, I’d go so far as to say that even criticism directed at it, which is not motivated by good-will, is nevertheless valid and even constructive from Israel’s point of view – as long as it is not based on falsehood.

Many Jews in Israel and abroad are genuinely disturbed by what they perceive as a lack of morality on Israel’s part. Pictures of Israeli soldiers patrolling menacingly in Arab towns do not convey an impression of humaneness and common decency on Israel’s part. Each military flare-up produces pictures of devastation and dead Arabs – often children – on the television screens of the world, and they fill many a Jewish heart with deep dismay, shame and anger – in the same way that any decent person seeing these pictures would feel.

The trouble is that the pictures seldom provide the background to each scene of mayhem inflicted on Arabs by Israel’s air force or ground troops. They seldom if ever, remind viewers that for over three generations, Arabs have been attacking Jews, often with the stated intention of killing ordinary civilians, including women and children. Pictures do not mention that a mangled, burning car in Gaza, hit by Israeli helicopters, was being used by terrorists driving to their next rocket-firing position. Pictures of dead Arab women and children never mention that terrorists were shooting at Israeli villages from the homes of these people, actually using them as human shields. Also, as has been often proved, many pictures are actually staged by Arab photographers, intent on creating a demonic image of Israel. The 2002 battle in Jenin was a classic example. So was the shameful, recently exposed Muhammad al-Durrah affair.

JEWS HAVE ALWAYS OPPOSED INJUSTICE

Since the latter part of the nineteenth century, Jews, especially in the democratic countries, had been in the forefront of every struggle for equality and justice. They were in the forefront in the struggle for real equality and civil rights for the blacks in America, and in apartheid South Africa, it was Jews who formed a major part of the white activists who risked jail and beatings, as well as exile. So it is natural that Jews should have qualms about the plight of Arabs living under Israeli jurisdiction in Judea and Samaria, and de facto independence in Gaza.

However, the dismay felt by many Jews around the world is mainly due to misinformation doled out by skillful spin artists, most of whom are Arabs, but also a number of eloquent Jews. Inform these good people of the real facts and many of them will eventually change their tune – and possible with a great sense of relief that they had been wrong about the morality of their people in Israel.

However, not all Jews who are appalled by what they perceive as Israeli brutality, are motivated in their condemnation of Israel by sentiments of pure compassion for the hapless Arabs. Many of these people are well aware of the true facts behind the Israel-Arab conflict, but they choose to ignore any Arab aggression and eagerly latch onto every Israeli reaction to Arab attacks as though Israel is the exclusively guilty party.

ACADEMICS SHOULD KNOW BETTER

The first major academic boycott attempt against Israel was initiated a few years ago by British Professors, husband and wife Steven and Hilary Rose, both Jews, who were central figures in the British National Association of Teacher in Further and Higher Education. This set the ball rolling among university lecturers around the world, reaching far-off Australia, where one of the initiators was yet another well-known Jewish academic, John Docker.

When reading material written by these people, one gets the impression that they are deeply concerned about their fellow human beings. But like with most anti-Israel activists, in their version of the situation, there is never any mention of the Arab aggression which from the very outset set off the conflict, and only one side of the conflict is always completely in the wrong – Israel.  But what was surprising with the Rose boycott initiative was that the hundreds of academics who signed the Israel boycott agreement, included ten Israeli academics tenured in top Israeli universities.

One of the most outspoken of these Israelis is Ilan Pappe, formerly from Haifa University, now a professor of history at Exeter University in England. He often mentions massacres perpetrated by Israel that never occurred, including the lie that Israeli committed a massacre in Jenin in 2002, despite copious refutation (including United Nations reports) of the bogus claim.

What drives Pappe and others like him to propagate the damaging lies and libel against his own country. It is not because he doesn’t have the facts. After all, the man was born in Israel, served in the army and is a professor of history. Yet he has stated that for him, facts are irrelevant and that truth will not deter the Jewish state's detractors. He says: “I am not as interested in what happened but in how people see what's happened.” (Le Soir [Bruxelles],Nov. 29, 1999).

Does his ability to twist facts stem from his affiliation with Communist ideology? (In 1996 Pappé ran in the Knesset elections on Hadash list.) Or does he carry the twisted Jewish self-hate bug, or is he simply a born rebel, opposed to anything that might seem mainstream? Whatever the answer, his activities are damaging to the Jewish people and to the State of Israel. Freedom of expression is an important value, but it should not be abused. Expression should always be based on truthfulness. What a monumental irony when academics tenured at prestigious universities, flout this principle!

And sadly there is a long list of prominent Jewish academics, many of whom are Americans – some at the forefront of their respective fields. Among the more well-known of these people are Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein who are frequently interviewed by various media channels and who deliver talks on their pet subject – Israel’s culbability in the Middle East tragedy. Prof. Finkelstein routinely compares Israelis with Nazis and compounds this crude observation by praising the “heroic resistance of Hezbollah to foreign occupation.”

Actually, it is the Arabs who suffer just as badly from all the one-sided condemnation of Israel, because it encourages them further to continue attacking Israel in their quest to weaken or destroy the Jewish state, which naturally leads to military retaliation, thereby perpetuating Arab misery. If I were an Arab leader, commited to the welfare of my people, I would beg these Jews to desist in their anti-Israel activities.

THEY HAVE TO BE COMBATTED

There are also hundreds and possibly thousands of other Jews actively churning out libellous material against Israel – some of it based on the fabrications and falsehoods of the above-mentioned people or inspired by them. There are also a few Jews who faithfully swell the ranks of anti-Israel demonstrations, or who help fill campus halls to boo and shout down anyone trying to tell the Israel-Arab conflict like it really is. There are also widely read columnists and bloggers. It’s quite possible that a sizeable percentage of these Jews are very decent, concerned human beings, courageously making a stand against what they deem is a terrible injustice. But they all base their notions on one-sided, usually totally false sources of information. These are the people who have to be contacted and engaged in a sober dialogue by anyone with a reasonable amount of relevant knowledge.

Whenever I get a mailing that bashes Israel, using lies, I respond. I enjoy getting into discussions with Israel’s detractors. (I never wage an argument – that never helps.) I think I might have helped tone down a few anti-Israel activists (Jewish and non-Jewish) and possibly even caused a shift in their perceptions of the Israel-Arab conflict.

But my activities in this field are still on a tiny scale. Occasionally, however, I am stumped by someone’s assertion or counter to something I have said, even though I think I have a pretty good knowledge of the conflict.

I know that there are many people in Israel and abroad who have a far greater knowledge of the facts than I have. Many also have ready access to factually-accurate ready-made answers to tough questions. I think that there is an urgent need for greater corroboration between individuals and organizations to pool their resources in order to combat more effectively the anti-Israel activities waged by Jews and non-Jews alike – on a one-on-one basis. I would be very glad to work together with others on this vital endeavor. Please regard this as a personal call if you can help. 

For more specific information on how to get bashers to question the validity of their notions, click:

http://truthandsurvival.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/how-to-deal-with-israel-bashers/ 

OTHER SOURCES

The other day my friend Prof. Kenny Preiss sent me a site created by Maurice Ostroff, which is truly brilliant and is highly recommendable: http://maurice-ostroff.tripod.com/

I also have added a short list of other very fine sites providing excellent information on the Israel-Arab conflict. I get a definite impression that all the people running the sites mentioned below are very careful about presenting facts that are as accurate as possible. There are also dozens of other fine, comprehensive, helpful sites on the web, that I haven’t yet had time to check out properly and I apologise to all those fine people whose sites I have not listed here.

www.israpundit.com

www.infoisrael.net

www.israelbehindthenews.com

www.pmw.org.il

www.israelandtruth.org

:)

Back in the mid 1990s when I first started attending Pars matches home and away, we had a terrific core support. Now, currently we still have a good core support in terms of number, which can hover anywhere between the 4-6,000 mark. Back then though, the crowd were right behind the team from the off- and could act as the proverbial 12th man.

Manager of the 1995/96 First Division winning team, club legend Bert Paton, noted that, in reference to the 1-0 defeat of Dundee United in the penultimate day which almost assured the Pars of the championship, "anyone who doubts our support is a 12th man should have heard the volume that day."

Those days are still there for the big games, but Pars fans in recent years have taken on a new side to their persona, and it is one of prejudging players, or finding a scapegoat for if things don't work out too well on the pitch.

Why am I bumbling on with this? Well, manager Jim McIntyre finally secured the signing of his top summer target this week in the shape of Inverness Caledonian Thistle striker, Graham Bayne. The Athletic paid the Highlanders £30,000 to lure the Fifer back to the Kingdom to bolster our attacking options which had been left down to the manager and youngsters such as Iain Williamson, following the departures of Mark Burchill and Stevie Crawford, adding to Jim Hamilton leaving for St Mirren in January.

Having seen him play with Caley against us before, I know exactly the kind of player we're getting. Bayne, as McIntyre points out, will bring a physical dimension to the team. He will act as a player to link the play, bring his team-mates into it and create chances for them.

"He is strong in the air and can hold the ball up. He is good with his back to goal and his strength is his team play. He works hard, runs the channels- he is just a good all round team player," McIntyre commented.

However, despite this, some Pars fans have immediately dismissed him as "rubbish" and "a waste of money". Why? The only thing they have looked at is his goalscoring record- 33 goals in 159 games. Admittedly, strikers will always be judged on their goalscoring record and Bayne's isn't exactly prolific, but I can't get my head around punters immediately dismissing him as a no-hoper.

McIntyre is fully aware that he isn't renowned for hitting 15-20 goals a season, but he will be able to lay on chances for a more prolific strike partner, with the boss working hard to sign at least 2 strikers as well as a right sided midfielder before we kick off our First Division assault at Partick Thistle in August.

Instead of prejudging, I wish some Dunfermline fans would wait until they've at least pulled on the black and white before assessing the contributions, or lack of, a player can make to the team. What should count in the hitman's favour is that he's determined to come in and work hard- Pars fans love a grafter- and is a Fifer, which is another plus point when playing for the West Fifers.

I welcome Graham to the club and am sure he will be a success. It would be ironic if he went on to score 20 odd goals and have his most prolific net bulging season- the opinions of those already judging him would soon change.

Law enforcement officials say the proposed policy would help them do exactly what Congress demanded after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: root out terrorists before they strike.

Although President Bush has disavowed targeting suspects based on their race or ethnicity, the new rules would allow the FBI to consider those factors among a number of traits that could trigger a national security investigation.

Currently, FBI agents need specific reasons - like evidence or allegations that a law probably has been violated - to investigate U.S. citizens and legal residents. The new policy, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press, would let agents open preliminary terrorism investigations after mining public records and intelligence to build a profile of traits that, taken together, were deemed suspicious.

Among the factors that could make someone subject of an investigation is travel to regions of the world known for terrorist activity, access to weapons or military training, along with the person's race or ethnicity.

More than a half-dozen senior FBI, Justice Department and other U.S. intelligence officials familiar with the new policy agreed to discuss it only on condition of anonymity, either because they were not allowed to speak publicly or because the change is not yet final.

The change, which is expected later this summer, is part of an update of Justice Department policies known as the attorney general guidelines. They are being overhauled amid the FBI's transition from a traditional crime-fighting agency to one whose top mission is to protect America from terrorist attacks.

"We don't know what we don't know. And the object is to cut down on that," said one FBI official who defended the plans.

Another official, while also defending the proposed guidelines, raised concerns about criticism during the presidential election year over what he called "the P word" - profiling.

If adopted, the guidelines would be put in place in the final months of a presidential administration that has been dogged by criticism that its counterterror programs trample privacy rights and civil liberties.

Critics say the presumption of innocence is lost in the proposal. The FBI will be allowed to begin investigations simply "by assuming that everyone's a suspect, and then you weed out the innocent," said Caroline Fredrickson of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey acknowledged the overhaul was under way in early June, saying the guidelines sought to ensure regulations for FBI terror investigations don't conflict with ones governing criminal probes. He would not give any details.

"It's necessary to put in place regulations that will allow the FBI to transform itself ... into an intelligence gathering organization in addition to just a crime solving organization," Mukasey told reporters.

The changes would allow FBI agents to ask open-ended questions about activities of Muslim- or Arab-Americans, or investigate them if their jobs and backgrounds match trends that analysts deem suspect.

FBI agents would not be allowed to eavesdrop on phone calls or dig deeply into personal data - such as the content of phone or e-mail records or bank statements - until a full investigation was opened.

The guidelines focus on the FBI's domestic operations and run about 40 pages long, several officials said. They do not specifically spell out what traits the FBI should use in building profiles.

One senior Justice Department official said agents have been allowed since 2003 to build "threat assessments" of Americans based on public records and information from informants. Such assessments could be used to open a preliminary investigation, the official said.

However, another official said the 2003 authorities are limited, tightly monitored by FBI headquarters in Washington and, overall, confusing to agents about how or when they can be used.

Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the guidelines governing when to open a national security investigation are part of a "harmonizing" process that will not give the FBI any more authority than it already has. He declined further comment, but he and two other senior Justice officials, would not deny the changes as they were described to AP by others familiar with the guidelines.

"Any review and change to the guidelines will reflect our traditional concerns for civil liberties and First Amendment liberties and our traditional investigative emphasis on using the least intrusive means feasible," Roehrkasse said Wednesday.

Although the guidelines do not require congressional approval, House members recently sought to limit such profiling by rejecting an $11 million request for the FBI's security assessment center. Lawmakers wrote it that was unclear how the FBI could compile suspect profiles "in such a way as to avoid needless intrusions into the privacy of innocent citizens" and without wasting time and money chasing down false leads.

The denial of funding could limit the FBI's use of profiles, or "predictive models and patterns of behavior" as the government prefers to describe the data-mining results, but would not change the guidelines authorizing them. The guidelines would remain in effect until a new attorney general decided to change them.

Courts across the country have overturned criminal convictions when defendants showed they were targeted based on race. Racial profiling generally is considered a civil rights violation, and former Attorney General John Ashcroft condemned it in March 2001 as an "unconstitutional deprivation of equal protection under our Constitution."

President Bush also has condemned racial profiling as "wrong in America" and in a December 2001 interview had harsh words for an airline that refused to let one of his Secret Service agents board a commercial flight. The agent was Arab-American. "If he was treated that way because of his ethnicity, that will make me madder than heck," Bush said.

Immediately after 9/11, hundreds of Muslims and Arabs were detained, deported and monitored as the government urgently sought information that could prevent another attack. Despite efforts to repair and nurture relationships with those groups, Muslim- and Arab-Americans still complain of being singled out by federal security practices.

Martin Redish, a constitutional and civil rights scholar at Northwestern University School of Law, said courts are likely to give the FBI a lot of leeway in deciding how to open national security investigations.

"But it's a very fine line to be drawn when the basis of the investigation is dominated by the ethnic background of the subject," Redish said. "And when the investigation results in harassment, you have a serious constitutional concern."

Citing Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski and Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh - two white Americans - the ACLU's Fredrickson said: "Profiling has sent us in the wrong direction. ... I thought we learned our lesson in that regard."

___

On the Net:

Justice Department: http://www.usdoj.gov/

FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/

ACLU: http://www.aclu.org/

Unfortunately, the terrorist managed to kill three people and wounded 45 people.

The driver rammed at least two buses, overturning one, and crushed several cars in a five-minute spree just after midday (7pm AEST) in west Jerusalem.

However this brings up some important issues; how was this guy allled to get into Israel? Quite easily actually.

He was identified as an Arab resident of East Jerusalem, whoheld an Israeli identification card, with full access to all parts of the country.

As well as this the guy was known to the police for raping a former girlfriend, he served two years. Hopefully, next time Israel will do a better job in not letting these people get citizenship. I really think that a citizenship test should be given to every Israeli citizen. Of course this begs another questions, why are we issueing Israeli ID cards to a possible fith element anyway?

The attack came at a highly sensitive time in intra-Palestinian politics, with Hamas struggling to hold together the truce with Israel, which has seen limited supplies allowed into the Gaza Strip in return for a stop to rocket fire on Israeli settlements.

Egypt immediately locked the Rafah crossing into the Strip, which had been due to open around the time of the attack. Hundreds of Palestinians on either side rioted in response.

Israeli security forces were last night interrogating the terrorist's family, amid calls by enraged members of parliament for them to be deported en masse to Gaza.

More on this event here.

[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.621040&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

Image via Wikipedia

I've decided to go to the Middle East for my holiday. I am going to Jordan. Some of us have heard or read about the late King Hussein and now his son, King Abdullah II and his beautiful wife Queen Rania. Also, the issue of Palestine, but most importantly for Westerners, Jordan (no, not Peter Andre's wife) it is in the river Jordan that Jesus was baptised. It has a rich and deep history that goes back to the Romans and even before. One of the Indiana Jones film was done in Petra, Jordan.

So, I need to learn a few words and phrases in Arabic (العربية). The Arabic language evolved from Aramaic. It is categorised into Quranic Arabic, Classical, Modern and the different dialects from the Middle East to
North Africa. Some Arabic words have made their way into Spanish and other languages. For example, Alcohol is Al-Kuhool.

My interest in Arabic begins with food, of course. I might post some recipes from my friends.

Food:

Felafel, hummus, shawarma (like doner kebab), baba ghanouj (mashed aubergines with tahini and eaten as a dip), kibbi, kebab, fasooliya (green beans), khobz (bread), batata (potato), samak (fish). In Middle Eastern restaurants, you might be first served with mizza (which includes tabooli, kibbi, hummus, baba ghanouj) , then the mishwiyat (kebabs and other grilled bar-b-q), then desserts, like baklawa (flaky pastry with nuts and pistachios drenched with honey), or booza (ice cream), or fakiha (fruits) and many other tasty dishes. This list is very short. Arabic food is varied and don't assume it's just kebabs. Kebabs are fast food, just like what we have here, McDonalds and Burger King.

Greetings:

Arabs, in general, are very hospitable and place a great emphasis on greetings. It is very formal and begins with deep greetings and enquiries into each other's health and so on.

Hello - Marhaba, or ahlan wa sahlan (welcome). Response would be - ahlan beekum.

Goodbye -ma'a salama and response is same

Good morning - sabah al-khayr, response sabah il noor

Good evening - masa al-khayr, response masa il noor

Good night - tisbah ala khayr, response wa inta min ahalu

Thank you - shukran, response afwan (you are welcome)

How are you? - kayfa haalak? (male), kayfa haalik? (addressing female)

Fine - al-hamdu lil lah

Please (request) - min fadlak (m), min fadlik (f)

Please (formal) - law samaht (m), law samahti (f)

What is your name? shoe ismak (m), shoe ismik? (f)

My name is - issmi

I - ana

you - inta (m), inti (f)

Do you speak English? - hal tatakallam ingleezi?

I speak - ana bahki or ana atakallam, English - ingleezi, French - faransi, German - almaani

That will be all for now...

Saudi Arabia

King Abdullah: Thanks America for Saving my Ass Now: Sin Vaselina to You! Happy Birthday!

John Mccain's personal friend King Abdullah of The Saudi Family which controls Saudi Arabia forever-you see, it's their farm (finca), said to Americans today to get use to the oil prices and you know what I mean (¡Sin baselina madrina!). When Saddam Hussein threatened their Kingdom in 1990 it was the United States the only country to put their soldiers in the line of fire to defend their privileges and wealth. Not even twenty years later they say "Screw YOU America." These are the guys who support John McCain's 100 Year War. Not even the hardcore republicans can justify that. How do you like it Manolo?!

We win the wars. We fight the wars for them. When someone like Saddam Hussein invades their country and rapes their women they go to Europe for vacation. What the hell! American soldiers will take care of the fighting! These guys are George Bush's friend, not the American People. It's always nice to have a George Bush and his friends to be there to send the Best of America to share their blood so The Arabs can raise oil prices...and they have the balls to say to Americans: "Get use to it" ¡Oye, Sin Vaselina! Read the whole story at the Drudge Report.

-any reservation party leaves a better tip than a walk-in

-foreigners are horrible tippers

-jewish people are horrible tippers

-arabic people eat later than most other guests

-some rich people are incredibly rude and think they are better than anyone else

-some people will be rude no matter how you try to accommodate them (see above, one is a man high in the rankings at Lifespan: Arthur Klein)

Ten Misconceptions About Islam

In this article, we will try to clear up many of the misconceptions that are prevalent about Islam. Before jumping into the list of misconceptions directly, it is important to give a little interesting background about the source of Islam.

Islam is the name of a way of life which the Creator wants us to follow. We avoid the word religion because in many non-Islamic societies, there is a separation of "religion and state." This separation is not recognized at all in Islam: the Creator is very much concerned with all that we do, including the political, social, economic, and other aspects of our society. Hence, Islam is a complete way of life.

The source of Islam is Allah, the Creator of everything known and unknown to us. He is One, and He is Unique. Allah has taught us about Islam via two mediums: the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Both the Qur'an and Sunnah were transmitted to us, humanity, via the Messenger of Allah: Muhammad bin Abdullah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him (saas). The Messenger of Allah was nothing more and nothing less than a mortal messenger of the immortal Creator.

The Qur'an is a book containing the literal Word of Allah. It was transmitted from Allah to an angel of His (Gabriel), and from the angel to the Messenger of Allah who delivered it to us. The Qur'an covers a wide variety of topics, including evidence to support its claim of being the Word of the Creator, stories of earlier generations, rules which humanity is asked to obey, and information about the Hereafter. The Qur'an claims that it is protected from change by other than Allah, and this is confirmed by its 1400 year history. The earliest copies and the latest copies are the same.

The Sunnah is the term used to describe how the Messenger of Allah (saas) lived his life. The Messenger's life is an example for all Muslims, or those who accept Islam, to follow. Whatever the Messenger (saas) did, said, or approved of is a source of Islam just as much as the Qur'an. The Messenger's role is not overemphasized: his life was dictated by what the Creator desired, and the Messenger did not add or subtract to Islam according to his own personal whim. His life was such that his wife called him "a walking Qur'an."

The Qur'an and Sunnah are the only two mediums by which Allah has directly taught us about Islam. This leads us to the following simple but critical principle:

If any man or woman engages in a belief or action which clearly contradicts the Qur'an or Sunnah, then that belief or action cannot be thought of as `Islamic'.

This rule applies whether the man or woman is Muslim or non-Muslim. Hence, we cannot equate Islam and the Muslims. Islam is the way of life; Muslims are people who claim to follow that way of life. A Muslim may claim to follow Islam, but be wrong. In the context of misconceptions, we can restate the above principle in a slightly different way:

Some misconceptions about Islam are due to the wrong beliefs and actions of Muslims, and others are due to a significant lack of understanding and false stereotyping by non-Muslims.

Several misconceptions are listed below. Instead of simply stating the misconception by itself, we have also included some reasons why people might adopt that misconception. Therefore, each entry in the list is given in the following form:

<Statement of misconception> because:

·