Tehran’s Holocaust Denial Conference

Tehran’s Holocaust Denial Conference
By P. David Hornik
FrontPageMagazine.com | December 5, 2006

Iran, which has often proclaimed its intent to carry out a second Holocaust, this time against the Jews concentrated in
will be holding a Holocaust-denial conference on December 11-12.

A certain illogic is evident: if you yourself find Jews so loathsome that you seek to exterminate them, why is it implausible that someone else should have had the same idea and acted on it, especially when so many people including all reputable historians say that is exactly what happened just six decades ago?


The illogic is compounded by the fact that just last August Teheran held an international Holocaust-cartoon contest in which the allegedly fictitious event served as material for the cartoonists’ creations.


Nevertheless, the website of Iran’s Foreign Ministry announces that the conference, to be called “Study of Holocaust: A Global Perspective,” aims to “create opportunities…for a suitable scientific research so the hidden and unhidden angles of this most important political issue of the 20th century become more transparent.” The ministry’s Institute for Political and International Studies is organizing the conference and calling on “researchers” to participate.

Topics will include “anti-Semitism, Nazism and Zionism: collaboration or animosity; the concept of Holocaust and its roots; views of revisionists; denial or admittance of gas chambers” as well as “the laws against those who deny Holocaust and killing of the Palestinians.”

A psychological issue is whether the seekers of a new Holocaust really disbelieve in the old one or just want to divest today’s Jews of the moral, political, and financial power they think the old Holocaust confers on them. On a more emotional level, the Iranian (and other) Holocaust deniers could be motivated by aggression toward the victims of Hitler’s Holocaust, seeking both to “murder” them a second time by denying their deaths while also mocking those deaths in cartoons and the like. This sense of aggression toward long-dead victims would only underline the severity of the hatred toward the still-living, somewhat-militarily-powerful Jews of Israel.

Teheran may now be the epicenter of such attitudes, but they radiate extensively from it to the Arab and Muslim worlds and beyond. In Europe, where Holocaust denial is still mostly considered in poor taste, the impatience with Israel’s continued existence is very much in vogue as seen, for instance, in a recent BBC symposium on whether Israel will continue to exist in fifty years, or in the poll of EU countries three years ago that ranked Israel “the greatest danger to world peace.” In America, prestigious scholars and former top officials push the view that Israel is (with its supporters) the crux of
America’s foreign policy problems and the cause of the world jihad movement.

In such a climate, it is no surprise that neither Teheran’s cartoon contest in August nor its upcoming denial convocation have drawn much attention. It also makes sense that the current leading second-Holocaust proponent, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has not only not been charged or penalized for his repeated calls for politicide and genocide—manifestly illegal under the UN Charter—but was received as an honored guest at the UN itself and the Council on Foreign Relations and granted a chummy Mike Wallace interview by CBS.

After not-quite six decades, the world, apart from still-substantial support in America and a few pockets of it elsewhere, has pretty much had it with the Jewish state and is content to trade or endlessly negotiate with
Iran as it quite openly and brazenly pursues that state’s destruction. The depth of such animosity lies beyond psychological conjecture.

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

American among group caught in Egypt recruiting for jihad in Iraq

American among group caught in Egypt recruiting for jihad in Iraq

“Egypt says arrested foreigners had terror links,” from AFP:

CAIRO (AFP) – A group of foreigners arrested in Egypt included French, US, Belgian, Syrian and Tunisian nationals with links to terror groups who were recruiting Islamists for “jihad” in Iraq, the authorities have said.

“The security services have dismantled an organisation whose members follow jihadist ideas and includes Arab and foreign elements living in Egypt under the pretence of studying Islam and Arabic,” an interior ministry statement said Monday.

“These individuals were found in possession of papers and documents pertaining to their organisation that confirm links to terror organisations outside” the country, it added.

The young Islamic fundamentalists are believed to have been arrested almost two weeks ago in Cairo’s Medinat Nasr neighbourhood.

They include nine French, two Belgian and an American national as well as Egyptians, Tunisians and Syrians, the ministry said.

“The investigation revealed that these people were seeking to recruit more elements, convert them to their destructive doctrine, incite them to jihad (holy war) and encourage them to travel to Iraq via third countries to carry out operations,” the statement said.

French diplomatic sources had confirmed the detention of 11 French Islamists last month in Cairo and Alexandria.

The 11, most of them from the Paris region, were the largest group of French Islamists to have been detained in Egypt. Four other French nationals were expelled in July 2005.

Despite the accusations in the interior ministry statement, other security sources had said nine of the French Islamists were due to be flown back to France this week and were deemed “not to be a threat to national security”.

Of which country?

Security sources speaking on condition of anonymity also confirmed that two Belgian nationals of Moroccan origin had been nabbed during the raid.

A US embassy spokesman refused to comment on the case of the American citizen allegedly detained as part of the sweep in Cairo’s Islamist student circles.

The Western nationals are mostly of African and North African origin and also include converts.


Egypt is believed to be a key recruitment point for Islamic militants. Several terror suspects detained in Western and other countries have studied in Cairo or the Mediterranean city of Alexandria.

Islam gets concessions; infidels get conquered

Islam gets concessions; infidels get conquered

“Double standards do not make for international justice.” An editorial by Raymond Ibrahim for The Los Angeles Times:

IN THE DAYS before Pope Benedict XVI’s visit last Thursday to the Hagia Sophia complex in Istanbul, Muslims and Turks expressed fear, apprehension and rage. “The risk,” according to Turkey’s independent newspaper Vatan, “is that Benedict will send Turkey’s Muslims and much of the Islamic world into paroxysms of fury if there is any perception that the pope is trying to re-appropriate a Christian center that fell to Muslims.” Apparently making the sign of the cross or any other gesture of Christian worship in Hagia Sophia constitutes such a sacrilege.

Built in the 6th century, Hagia Sophia — Greek for “Holy Wisdom” — was Christendom’s greatest and most celebrated church. After parrying centuries of jihadi thrusts from Arabs, Constantinople — now Istanbul — was finally sacked by Turks in 1453, and Hagia Sophia’s crosses were desecrated, its icons defaced. Along with thousands of other churches in the Byzantine Empire, it was immediately converted into a mosque, the tall minarets of Islam surrounding it in triumph. Nearly 500 years later, in 1935, as part of reformer Kemal Ataturk’s drive to modernize Turkey, Hagia Sophia was secularized and transformed into a museum.

Protests aimed at keeping the pope out of Hagia Sophia rocked Istanbul right up to the morning of his visit to the site. Contrast that intolerance with the tolerance granted Muslims in regard to the Al Aqsa mosque — this time, an Islamic site in Jerusalem annexed by Judaism. Unlike the permanent Muslim desecration of Hagia Sophia, after Israel’s victory in the 1967 war, the Jews did not deface or convert the mosque into a Jewish synagogue or temple, even though the Al Aqsa mosque is deliberately built atop the remains of the Temple Mount, the holiest site of Judaism and, by extension, an important site for Christians. Moreover, since reclaiming the Temple Mount, Israel has granted Muslims control over the Al Aqsa mosque (except during times of crises).

All this illustrates the privileged status that many Muslims expect in the international arena. When Muslims conquer non-Muslim territories — such as Constantinople, not to mention all of North Africa, Spain and southwest Asia — those whom they have conquered as well as their descendants are not to expect any apologies, let alone political or territorial concessions.

Herein lies the conundrum. When Islamists wage jihad — past, present and future — conquering and consolidating non-Muslim territories and centers in the name of Islam, never once considering to cede them back to their previous owners, they ultimately demonstrate that they live by the age-old adage “might makes right.” That’s fine; many people agree with this Hobbesian view.

But if we live in a world where the strong rule and the weak submit, why is it that whenever Muslim regions are conquered, such as in the case of Palestine, the same Islamists who would never concede one inch of Islam’s conquests resort to the United Nations and the court of public opinion, demanding justice, restitutions, rights and so forth?

Put another way, when Muslims beat infidels, it’s just too bad for the latter; they must submit to their new overlords’ rules with all the attendant discrimination and humiliation mandated for non-Muslims. Yet when Islam is beaten, demands for apologies and concessions are expected from the infidel world at large.

Double standards do not make for international justice. Either territorial conquests are always unjust and should therefore be ameliorated through concessions, or else they are merely a manifestation of the natural order of things — that is, survival of the fittest.

If some Muslims wish to wage eternal jihad until Islam dominates the globe, they are only being true to Islam and its doctrines as they understand it. However, in that case, where the world is divided into two warring camps, Islam and Infidelity — or, in Islamic terms, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War — how can these Muslims expect any concessions from the international community? The natural conclusion of the view that “might makes right” is “to the victor go the spoils.”

The fact that Turkey conquered Constantinople more than 500 years ago does not prevent the Turkish government from returning Hagia Sophia to Christendom today, which would undoubtedly be a great gesture. But of course that can never be. The Muslim world would undergo a “paroxysm of fury” if a Christian pope dares pray in the conquered church; what would the Muslim world do if Hagia Sophia were actually converted back to a church?