Sunday, October 7, 2007

Ahmadinejad's Plan for Peace: Banish the Jews to Alaska

President Ahmadinejad of Iran apparently has a non-violent 'final solution' in mind for the Jews.

It seems that I wasn't very far off. I opined that "the Muslims who celebrate Al Quds Day would be delighted to see Jerusalem free of Jewish control. They'd also, I suspect, just as soon have Jerusalem and Israel a Jew-free zone."

Here's how an Associate Press article put it. "The Iranian president once again said Palestinians should not pay any price because Europeans committed crimes against Jews in World War II. He said they could give a part of their own land in Europe or Alaska so that the Jews can establish their country there.

"'I ask European governments supporting Zionists and the American people ... will you allow occupation of part of your land under a pretext and then talk about a two-state solution?' Ahmadinejad said after the rallies."

Well, comparatively non-violent. I doubt that Jews in Israel would go quietly.

Thanks to the likes of U. of C., Boulder's Ward Churchill, 'everybody knows' how awful America was, committing genocide and/or moving people like the Sioux around without their consent. That seems to be why 83 Columbus Day Parade protesters spread fake blood and dismembered dolls on the Denver, Colorado, parade route today.

It's odd, how high-minded people are upset by the blatant treaty and human rights violations of 19th century America, but remarkably silent about what happened to Armenians around 1916.

One reason may be that Turkey says that what happened wasn't genocide, just a series of regrettable accidents that just happened to coincide with the deportation of some Armenians.

I'm inclined to see the attitude of many academics and journalists this way:
  • Treatment of American Indians - Genocide!!!
  • Armenian Genocide - What Armenian Genocide?
  • Death to America! Death to the Jews! - America wants war!!!
Maybe that's unfair. It's been a dark, dreary day here in Minnesota: Maybe I'm just grouchy.

Or, maybe some of the important information gatekeepers in today's American culture don't see the big picture.

Related posts, on Individuals and the War on Terror.

1 comment:

Ottavio (Otto) Marasco said...

That is a tad dark, no not Minnesota the comment. However, to be perfectly candid my readings here and there suggest that your interpretations of the attitudes of academics and journalists are quite reasonable.

Take care there.

Unique, innovative candles

Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store


Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.