“Useful Idiots” Convene in Madrid

“Useful Idiots” Convene in Madrid

Created 2008-07-17 14:02
The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud of Saudi Arabia, and the Custodian of Postmodern European Secularism, Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, on July 16 opened the World Conference on Dialogue in Madrid.
 
The aim of the event is to promote dialogue between the world’s main religions, and, as some observers suspect, to establish a one-world religion based on Islam. More than 200 leaders of different religions [pdf], including Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Universalism, Marxism and Multiculturalism, are attending the three-day conference. Also attending are leading personalities specialized in dialogue and useful topics such as “life of human societies, international cooperation, human rights, security and peace and living peacefully together.”
 
The conference is being organized by the Muslim World League (also known as the World Islamic League) following an initiative by King Abdullah, whose country is the birthplace of Islam, a religion of peace. The Muslim World League also happens to be the principal agent for the propagation of Wahhabi Islam in Europe. In 1987, it was elected as a “Messenger of World Peace” by the United Nations.
 
Saudi officials said Spain was chosen as the site for the gathering because of its historical symbolism as a place where Muslims and those Jews and Christians who paid the dhimmi tax lived in peace under Islamic rule between the 8th and 13th centuries.
 
The event will take place against a backdrop of tensions between the Islamic world and the West due to the intolerable intolerance of the latter. They range from restrictions on the use of the veil by Muslim women in some European countries to cartoons regarded as blasphemous by Muslims and the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
 
The conference, which seeks to promote openness, consists of five closed-door round tables. They will be followed by a final communiqué to be issued on July 18.
 
The first session, titled “Dialogue and Its Religious and Civilizational Foundations,” will be chaired by the secretary-general of the Millennium World Peace Summit. The session will touch upon touchy topics such as “Dialogue in Islam” and “Dialogue in Christianity.”
 
The second session is titled “Dialogue and Its Importance in Society.” A president of the World Conference of Religions for Peace will present a paper on “Dialogue and Interaction of Cultures and Civilizations,” while the president of the Foundation for a Culture of Peace, will speak on “Dialogue and its Impact on Peaceful Coexistence.” Other lofty topics for discussion include: “Dialogue and Its Impact on International Relations” and “Dialogue in the Face of Calls for the Clash of Civilizations and End of History.”
 
The third session, titled “Common Human Values in Areas of Dialogue,” will be chaired by the secretary-general of the World Conference of Religions for Peace. Featured speakers are the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); the secretary-general of the World Forum for Proximity of Islamic Schools of Thought in Iran; and the rector of the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue at the Vatican.
 
The fourth session is titled “Evaluation and Promotion of Dialogue” and will be chaired by the secretary-general of the Jewish Congress in Latin America and the Caribbean. This session will cover topics such as “Muslim-Christian-Jewish Dialogue: Its Future & Horizons” and “Efforts of States and International Organizations in Augmenting Dialogue and Overcoming its Obstacles.”
 
The fifth session is titled “Disseminating of Culture and Co-Existence of Dialoge.” It will focus on topics such as: “Media and its Impact on Disseminating the Culture of Dialogue and Co-Existance.”
 
The final communiqué will be read out by the assistant secretary of the Muslim World League.
 
Saudi Arabia hopes the conference will prove that it is trying to: 1) shed its international image of harboring a xenophobic religious establishment; and 2) moderate clerical conservatism that even objects to women driving cars.
 
According to Reuters, the conference offers Saudi Arabia a chance to declare its “openness and willingness to cooperate with the international community […] It marks a new direction for Saudi Arabia, whose Wahhabi Islam has come in for criticism internationally” after 15 of the 19 Arabs who killed some 3,000 people in the September 11 attacks in the United States were Saudis.
 
Abdullah al-Turki, the head of the Muslim World League and conference organizer, says: “Saudi Arabia, on whose ground the global message of Islam was launched, affirms to the whole world its openness and cooperation with the world community.”
 
And then, just in case there was any doubt, al-Turki adds: “Islam requires Muslims to inform people about Islam as the final divine message that came after the previous prophets.”
 
So why is the hyper-secular and hyper-tolerant Zapatero embracing one of the most theologically intolerant strands of Islam? And why is he turning Spain into a Saudi public relations rehab center? Zapatero (like his Saudi counterparts, but for different reasons) views Judeo-Christianity as public enemy number one because it is the main impediment to the realization of his vision for a socialist multicultural utopia in which everything goes. And he hopes his pact with Islam will accelerate Spanish history.
 
Zapatero and his socialist advisors believe Muslims are the “useful idiots” of the left. And Muslims believe Zapatero and his socialist friends are the “useful idiots” of Islam. Such is the future of Spain. 

 


‘Jihad recruiters’ held in Spain

‘Jihad recruiters’ held in Spain

Jihad recruitment in al-Andalus. Can anyone explain why Spain should admit anyone from Morocco into the country, given that this sort of thing goes on with apparently no opposition from other Muslim Moroccans in Spain? From the BBC, with thanks to WriterMom:

Spanish police have arrested 14 suspected Islamist militants, mostly in the north-eastern region of Catalonia.The suspects were allegedly involved in recruiting jihadi volunteers for training in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Police in Catalonia detained 11 in Barcelona and other towns. The others were arrested in Madrid and Malaga.

The interior ministry believes the majority of those arrested are Moroccan nationals. Police have confiscated a considerable amount of computer data.

Spain’s Policy of Appeasing Terrorists Backfires

Spain’s Policy of Appeasing Terrorists Backfires

José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, Spain’s accidental prime minister who was thrust into office by the Islamic terrorists who set off a series of train bombs in Madrid only three days before the 2004 general elections, has just marked his third year in power.

Since taking office, Zapatero, who is dogmatically attached to the ideas of the European left, has presided over controversial domestic and foreign policies that range from legalizing gay marriage to supporting the separatist aspirations of regional Basque and Catalan nationalists to selling weapons to the authoritarian regime of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela.

Zapatero has also managed to re-open many of the wounds that most Spaniards thought had been put to rest with the end of the Franco dictatorship (1975) and the advent of democracy (1978). The result is that Spain is more divided today than at any time in its modern history.

Nowhere have Zapatero’s policies been more controversial than in his approach to countering terrorism. In fact, Zapatero, a self-proclaimed feminist, lately has committed a number of blunders so outrageous that Spaniards of all political leanings now fear that he has made Spain more, not less, vulnerable to terrorism.

Zapatero’s ‘Truce’ With Islamic Extremists

A few days after taking office in April 2004, Zapatero withdrew the 1,300 Spanish troops that were deployed to Iraq by the previous government of José Maria Aznar. Opponents of the withdrawal accused Zapatero of naively thinking that the threat posed by Al-Qaeda terrorists exists only because of the war in Iraq. And although it is true that a most Spaniards opposed the intervention in Iraq, many also believed that Zapatero’s precipitous action smacked of appeasement that not only weakened Spanish national security, but also destroyed the international credibility and stature that Spain had built up during the Aznar government.

Although the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq did not make much of a strategic difference in terms of the war effort, the move sent a symbolic message that represented a major victory for Al-Qaeda. Because what Zapatero did not seem to understand was that Islamic radicals still consider four-fifths of Spain to be Muslim land that must be liberated from the Spanish infidels who drove out the Moors in what is known as the Reconquista (1492). Thus by appearing to give in to the demands of medieval-minded Islamic extremists, Zapatero reinforced the perception that it is the terrorists, not the government, that sets the agenda in Spain.

Confirming the growing suspicion that Zapatero’s post-modern approach to fighting terrorism lacks a basis in reality, he told TIME Magazine in September 2004 that ‘sexual equality is a lot more effective against terrorism than military strength’. At the same time, he announced an ill-defined initiative he calls the ‘Alliance of Civilizations’, which borrows heavily from the ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’ concept promoted by Islamic radicals in Iran during the 1990s; in its essence, the initiative calls on the West to negotiate a truce with Islamic terrorists, and on terms set by the latter.

Indeed, Zapatero seems to believe that multilateral group therapy is the best way to work out his differences with the Islamic extremists who want to take over his country. But the prime minister’s initiative has been widely criticized in Spain and elsewhere because of its failure to comprehend that Al-Qaeda and other Islamic extremists are at war not just with Spain or other individual states, but with the very ideals of Western society…and especially with post-modernist hyper-secularists like Zapatero himself.

But now that Zapatero has had three years in office to test his feminist approach to fighting terrorism, has it brought any tangible benefits for Spain? A Google-search on Zapatero will show that he is almost universally held up as the epitome of a post-modern appeaser. Even those on the political left in a Europe that is awash with like-minded equivocators have expressed serious doubts about the wisdom and efficacy of Zapatero’s anti-terrorist policies.

But what do the terrorists think? Well, they seem to understand Zapatero better than Zapatero understands himself. Indeed, in March 2007, Al-Qaeda launched new threats against Spain, this time over its military deployment in Afghanistan. In a video, a hooded man said the presence of Spanish troops in Afghanistan “exposes Spain again to threats” unless they withdraw their troops from the country. “The Spanish people have been tricked by a socialist government which withdrew troops from Iraq and sent 600 to Afghanistan,” the man proclaimed.

Then on April 11, the Islamic terrorists who claimed responsibility for an attack which killed some 25 people in Algeria, called for the reconquest of Spain. “We will not be in peace until we set our foot again in our beloved al-Andalus,” Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb warned. That prompted Spanish anti-terrorism judge Baltasar Garzon to caution that Spain was at a “very high risk” of suffering an Islamist attack. So much for Zapatero’s truce with Islam.

Zapatero’s ‘Truce’ With Basque Extremists

Notwithstanding the embarrassing setbacks for Spain vis-à-vis Islamic extremists, however, Spaniards have reserved their fiercest criticism of Zapatero over his domestic anti-terrorism policies.

And critics across the political spectrum say that nowhere has the prime minister erred as much as when, in June 2006, he agreed to begin a dialogue with ETA, the Basque separatist group, without first requiring that the group disarm. ETA, which is listed as a terrorist organization by both the European Union and the United States, has killed almost 1,000 people over the past four decades in its quest for an independent Basque state in seven parts of northern Spain and southwest France.

To initiate his dialogue with ETA, however, Zapatero pulled out of an agreement that he himself had proposed in 2000 with the PP not to talk with ETA unless it agreed to disarm. “Any normal person understands you can’t negotiate with someone whose negotiating weapon is as powerful and hard to argue with as a pistol,” PP leader Mariano Rajoy said at the time. The PP also opposed any talks with Batasuna, the outlawed political front of ETA.

This split between Spain’s two main political parties had the effect of limiting public support for a negotiated settlement; it also left the PP positioned to gain politically should the peace process break down. Zapatero, on the other hand, made the peace process the centerpiece of his political agenda in the hopes that a resolution to the Basque conflict would help him secure an easy re-election victory in early 2008. This highly risky proposition, however, also made him acutely vulnerable to intimidation from ETA.

Indeed, during the final months of 2006, ETA began complaining that the peace process had stalled because Madrid was refusing to make preliminary concessions. For example, ETA has long demanded that more than 400 of its prisoners, who are being held in locations across Spain, be moved closer to the Basque region. ETA has also insisted that the government stop arresting ETA suspects and that it legalize Batasuna.

Undeterred, Zapatero said at a year-end news conference on December 29 that his peace initiative was making progress. “Are we better off now with a permanent cease-fire, or when we had bombs, car bombs and explosions?” he asked. “This time next year, we will be better off than we are today.”

The very next morning, ETA set off a powerful car bomb at Madrid’s International Airport, killing two people and bringing to a dramatic end nine months of a so-called ‘permanent cease-fire’. The bombing caught Zapatero completely by surprise and shattered his attempt to solve the 40-year Basque conflict through dialogue. It also sent hundreds of thousands of Spaniards onto the streets in rallies to protest the attack and left a reeling Zapatero fighting for his political future.

The attack has produced a profound split within Spain: on the one hand, there are those on the left who remain open to the idea of re-establishing some sort of dialogue with ETA in the future; on the other hand, there are those on the right who believe that ETA must be forced into an unconditional surrender.

But by far the most controversial decision Zapatero has made since taking office was to convert the prison sentence of Iñaki de Juana Chaos, a high-profile member of ETA, to house arrest. De Juana began a hunger strike in November 2006 to protest a second jail sentence, which he received for ‘inciting terrorism’ (he had already completed an 18-year term for the murder of 25 people). In March 2007, when de Juana was reportedly near death after more than 100 days without eating, Zapatero agreed to allow de Juana to finish his sentence at his home in the Basque Country.

The outrage felt by Spaniards across the political spectrum was immediate; spontaneous anti-government demonstrations have been held across Spain. In response to the criticism, however, the Zapatero government justified its decision with an incredible statement that perfectly encapsulates the moral confusion of the post-modern mindset: “One of the differences between terrorists and us is that for us, life is important, no matter whether the person is a terrorist or not, and this is where our moral legitimacy derives,” said Interior Minister Alfredo Rubalcaba.

Many Spaniards say it was weakness, not morals, that guided Zapatero’s decision. Indeed, critics of the government say that although the Madrid bombing should have brought an end to the fledgling peace process, it did not, in fact, diminish Zapatero’s willingness to negotiate with terrorists. Others argue that Zapatero allowed himself to be blackmailed by ETA, and that he caved in to that blackmail. Some suspect he still hopes that a resolution to the Basque conflict will earn him another term as prime minister.
 
Whatever the rationale behind Zapatero’s decision to free de Juana, it has divided Spain in a way not seen since the 1936-1939 Spanish Civil War. And that, say critics, is precisely the problem. Because when Spain is divided, terrorists are strengthened.

Indeed, in Zapatero’s Spain, the terrorists seem to have more influence than the government. And many Spaniards now fear it’s only a matter of time until they strike again.
Soeren Kern is Senior Analyst for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group.

Spain: the European Iran

Spain: the European Iran
By Ignacio Russell Cano
FrontPageMagazine.com | January 29, 2007

January 25, 2007 joins the annals of history as the first time a part of
Europe adopted Ahmadinejad’s customs officially. Those studying the transformation of Europe in Eurabia will surely see the case of Ciempozuelos (
Madrid) as the first warning of the Islamification of Spain. However, the picture is slightly different.

Ciempozuelos is a village near
Madrid. Excluding punctual scandals – like the major’s recent resignation under charges of corruption – for the 12,768 inhabitants of Ciempozuelos, life is good – and progressive. The Socialist Party PSOE calls the shots, so it was no surprise when the town announced there was not going to be any commemoration of the Holocaust Memorial Day, which Miguel Ángel Moratinos, Spanish Foreign Minister, likes to say he established in Spain (even though the date was established in the Berlin Accords signed by previous Prime Minister Jose María Aznar in 1995
).

The townhall will host the Day of the Palestinian Genocide instead, a hate-fest against
Israel, Israelis and Jews in general.
 

Middle East politics notwithstanding, attacks against Jews in
Spain keep rising. The Foreign Minister himself, known for his pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel points of view, starred in an episode a few days after the Spanish PM Jose Luis Rodríguez Zapatero appeared wearing a Palestinian handkerchief. Spanish businessman Mauricio Hatchuel Toledano was heavily admonished in front of an astonished press by Moratinos when Mr. Hatchuel, a Jew, pointed out the fact that no one in Spain – Osama, Chávez, Castro, Putin, and Ahmadinejad – is so heavily attacked by Zapatero’s executive as
Israel. Moratinos simply could not argue. In a country whose citizenship jumped to the streets to protest for the Lebanon war carrying swastikas to denounce
Israel’s existence and as part of the western government congratulated by Nasrallah himself in one of his fatwa-speeches, Moratinos was forced to use the only method he could to shut up critics: It is not true because I tell you so.

 

While the sensation of the day is Abbas’ visit to Spain – the Foreign Ministry is working heavily to make Madrid one of the capitals to host a Middle East conference plan – Zapatero’s position towards the Holocaust was known around one year ago, when European MP Vidal-Quadras explained in Intereconomia Radio a dark, grim Spanish episode very revealing in terms of Spanish anti-Semitism. To make a long story short, during a semi-official dinner, Zapatero said he quite understands the Nazis, since the Jews are a problem.

 

Zapatero’s position nowadays is not exactly comfortable. Together with the usual progressive steps upon arriving to power – social security, education, the law of the civil war, etc. – Zapatero introduced what the calls “the process,” Spain’s very own Oslo Accords. The idea is to give the Marxist Leninist group ETA everything it asks for (including whole parts of Spain like Navarra, in a move some say reminiscent of Hitler’s claims over Czech Republic) in order to “bring peace.” The problem looming was not only Spanish language – “diálogo” in Spanish means that ETA should be offering something too – but a terrorist attack against Spanish airport T4 weeks ago. Zapatero visited the zero zone only days after the attack (more time than it took Bush to visit ground zero after Katrina) to announce he was not renouncing his idea of “dialogue.” With increasing unemployment, no industry and a revival of higher, new taxes, Zapatero’s numbers are plunging faster than Bush’s. It’s terror, stupid! 

The Spanish position in the EU is not easy either. After outspoken attacks against every single European major leader – from “loser” Merkel to “dickhead” Blair – Zapatero is struggling against German giant E’On. The company is trying to buy Spanish company Endesa through a cleanly legal acquisition process, but after putting his men in charge of many important business and banks, Zapatero promised Endesa to a government-friendly Gas Natural. This fraudulent procedure is not liked by “the looser” – German Chancellor Angela Merkel – who seems ready to give more than a headache a la española during this German European presidency.

Many in Europe – outside of France this time – are questioning if it was right to get Spain inside the CEE back in the 80’s, asking if Zapatero is to follow European rules every time, or only when German funds pours in. In any case, 2007 is the last year
Spain receives European funds, which means more problems for an economy based on the brick, exclusively. A Peace Conference in Spain is the ideal recipe: it would avoid European critics, would eclipse Socialist scandals, would shut up Spanish opposition accusations of irrelevance in the world (something that is threatening Moratino’s head even under his current Islamist protection) and would signal to Arab countries that when it comes to pressing for Israel’s disappearing, Spain is the right place to begin pouring petrodollars.
 

Does Ciempozuelos host a huge immigrant Muslim community? The answer is negative; the Non-Holocaust Day move seems to come to the rescue of extreme leftist groups that, after years of claiming “genocide” in the
Middle East, are watching the numbers of Hamas-Fatah victims as increasingly dangerous. At the current rate, Palestinian victims of Palestinians will surpass the “Palestinian of the holocaust” in less than a year. Also, in a country increasingly Muslim, many people are beginning to ask if the judenreinification of Gaza was necessary, useful, or practical, or if Moroccan dealings in Córdoba and
Seville expelling non-Muslims from whole neighborhoods are not “occupation.” However, no one pretends to hide the fact this is nothing more than a simple excuse. The Socialist Party of Spain is clearly anti-Semitic, both in its public outbursts and in its private dealings to press the Jewish community not to talk.

Together with anti-Semitism comes anti-Americanism. Many members of the Socialist Party claim that it’s Moratinos who is to blame for the huge spike of anti-Americanism in
Spain. Some journalists even show faxes sent by the FM to newspapers through his contacts in Spanish news agency EFE: call this one “insurgent,” do not call this one “terrorist.” In
Spain, Palestinian terrorists are not captured by IDF; they are “kidnapped.” But American tapes about the war in
Iraq are “American propaganda” (Cuatro TV, January 26). Al Qaeda videos are “tapes of resistance.” The Spanish goal in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict seems to be a huge concentration camp for Jews, “protected” by some “Peace Troops” and directed from
Brussels. Hence the obscenity of a peace conference in
Madrid.

 

Is the multicultural ideal another Leftist utopia condemned to failure, such as the
USSR? Probably. But the Spanish multicultural ideal never included Jews. Even as OSCE member,
Spain does nothing against anti-Semites. Just recently, Moratinos announced another organization to “combat Islamophobia” (a.k.a. shut any criticism against Islamism) while he says nothing about anti-Semitism. When something happens, some imaginary Nazi is the one to blame (together with the Popular Party), or some old Catholic prejudice (as leftist fringe, Zapatero’s government is also keen on attacking Catholics for “secularity” reasons, although Spanish public schools teach “Islam”).
 

When all this is taken in count, Spanish citizen behavior is almost heroic. Leftist government fills the air with anti-Semitism with vague excuses of Arabism, peace, security, and the hidden need of a judenrein
Middle East. On the other hand, Saudi petrodollars are bribing increasing amounts of Spanish journalists through Muslim organizations in Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia and Murcia to talk about Iraq, but also about the Wahhabi version of the
Middle East. Journalists earning less than 1000 EUR a month are driving BMW cars, and there seems to be a pact of silence inside many Spanish newspapers not to ask a single word.

 So the Spanish paradise of coexistence does not include Jews, as equals at least. It’s unfair however for the PSOE to tell the story this way. More than one old member of the party does not stand Zapatero, and more than a half of the party does not want him in the party or the government, or this is what they say in private. There are also those who claim that Israel is just a collateral victim of PSOE war against the US: the US is the source of every illness in the world, and in order to reduce the Great Satan’s influence in the world, as the Imperial foot in the Middle East (a.k.a. a country that is not anti-American),
Israel must disappear.
 

In about a couple of hours, the links to Ciempozuelos’ version of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be broken, and none will know a word about the initiative. As a symptom, however, it could not be clearer. No wonder why Spanish Jews are considering aliyah. A country ready and willing to receive tourists? No, tourists should avoid it right away.

Spanish bishops fear rebirth of Islamic kingdom

Spanish bishops fear rebirth of Islamic kingdom

And they have every reason to, since after all, Spain is part of dar al-Islam. By Elizabeth Nash in the Independent, with thanks to Andrew Bostom:

Spain’s bishops are alarmed by ambitious plans to recreate the city of Cordoba – once the heart of the ancient Islamic kingdom of al-Andalus – as a pilgrimage site for Muslims throughout Europe.Plans include the construction of a half-size replica of Cordoba’s eighth century great mosque, according to the head of Cordoba’s Muslim Association. Funds for the project are being sought from the governments of the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, and Muslim organisations in Morocco and Egypt.Other big mosques are reportedly planned for Medina Azahara near Cordoba, Seville and Granada.

The bishops of those cities are alarmed at the construction of ostentatious mosques, fearing that the church’s waning influence may be further eclipsed by resurgent Islam financed from abroad. Up to one million Muslims are estimated to live in Spain. Many are drawn by a romantic nostalgia for the lost paradise of Al-Andalus, the caliphate that ruled Spain for more than five centuries.

Last month, Spanish Muslims reasserted their right to pray in Cordoba’s great mosque. The mosque houses within its arches a cathedral built to consolidate Catholic rule after Muslims were expelled from Spain in 1492. Muslims are forbidden to pray in the building.

Mansur Escudero, president of Spain’s Islamic Council, has challenged the current head of Spain’s Episcopal Conference, Bishop Ricardo Blazquez of Bilbao, to explain why Muslims could not pray in Cordoba’s mosque. Mr Escudero said he had been encouraged by the Pope’s act of prayer in Istanbul’s Blue Mosque on his recent visit to Turkey. “It showed that mosques are open to Christian worshippers,” he said. “Could not Muslims pray in Cordoba’s mosque?”

This is so astoundingly disingenuous, it takes my breath away. Mosques are most certainly not open to Christian worshippers, in Turkey or anywhere else. Can you imagine what would happen if a group of Christians went into a mosque anywhere in the world and began Christian prayers, as Muslims do in the Cordoba cathedral? I think you can.

Bishop Blazquez replied that public collective praying was prohibited, but he supposed private or individual prayer was acceptable. Mr Escudero then announced that Muslims would henceforth return to Cordoba’s mosque to pray “in a respectful, private and individual capacity”. The bishops hit back, insisting that “Muslims cannot in any way pray in Cordoba cathedral”.

Good for Bishop Blazquez. Let the Turks give back the Hagia Sophia, and then we’ll talk.