FTR#543—Hell and High Water—Cartoongate and the Dubai Ports Controversy—(Two
30-minute segments) (Sources are noted in parentheses.) (Recorded on
3/05/2006.)
Note: FTR#’s 260-316, 317,
324, FTR#325 and succeeding programs are streaming
on Real Audio at www.wfmu.org/daveemory.
FTR#’s 01-270, 316-324 are available for download
only, also on Real Audio, on their Archive Page.)
Note!! WFMU is now
podcasting the For The Record Shows. For details, access: http://podcast.wfmu.org/
Listeners are emphatically encouraged to use the
internet to disseminate as much of the audio and printed material as possible. Note: all of this material is free.
Note: It is
recommended that listeners print the program descriptions for optimum
readability. It is emphatically
encouraged that listeners use the printed files on the Spitfire web site and
the audio files on the WFMU web sites to create their own research/teaching
databases.
NEW!! A diligent listener is turning the For The Record
descriptions into a blog. The URL is: http://ftrSummary.blogspot.com/. In addition, the listener has put together
a blog for the RFA descriptions: http://rfaSummary.blogspot.com/.
Listeners are emphatically encouraged to utilize these spots.
Listeners are
strongly encouraged to utilize the SPITFIRE search function in order to enhance
their understanding of the material. The search function can be accessed at: http://www.spitfirelist.com/FTR_search.html.
NOTE: TWO
LECTURES PRESENTING MR. EMORY’S VIEWS OF WHAT WE CAN EXPECT IN THE FUTURE ARE
NOW AVAILABLE FOR DOWLOAD FOR FREE IN
BOTH REAL AUDIO AND MP3. These lectures are:
L-1: ‘The Political Implications of the UFO Phenomenon and the ‘ET’ Myth’; and
L-2: ‘The Future--Technology, Theocracy and the Thousand-Year-Reich.’
Descriptions are available in the Lecture Series section.
NEW!! A number of
vitally important books are now available for download for FREE. The books are:
Martin Bormann: Nazi in
Exile by Paul Manning; The Nazis Go Underground
by Curt Reiss; and All Honorable Men (parts 1 and 2) by James
Stewart Martin. Taken together, these books will provide a significant
understanding of the concept and reality of The Underground Reich, and they can
be downloaded with a modem Internet connection. They are available at: Spitfirelist.com/Books. In addition, we have added Cairo to Damascus by John Roy Carlson [1951], Germany Plots with the Kremlin by T.H. Tetens [1953], and Armies of Spies by Joseph Golomb [1939].
Yet another recent addition is Germany’s
Master Plan by Joseph Borkin and Charles Welsh. (Borkin is the author of
the 1979 classic The Crime and Punishment
of I.G. Farben.) Another anti-fascist classic about I.G. Farben supplements
the Borkin and Welsh text—Treason’s Peace
by Howard Watson Ambruster. Two more recently-posted gems are The Thousand-Year Conspiracy by Paul
Winkler and Falange by Alan Chase,
both published in 1943. The Winkler text documents the evolution of militant
Pan-Germanism from the Teutonic Knights to the Nazis and Falange documents the Third Reich’s geopolitical goals in the
Spanish-speaking world. By the time many of you read this description, more of
the long-out-of-print anti-fascist books that are more than 50 years old will
have been added to the Spitfirelist.com/Books URL. The Manning text’s URL also features a discussion of
Paul Manning’s career and professional credentials. Martin Bormann: Nazi in Exile is also available in html. Note also that FTR#305
has a synoptic overview of the Bormann organization. An understanding of the
Bormann organization is essential for an in-depth grasp of the arguments
presented on For The Record.
Note also that U.S. Government documents proving Prescott
Bush Sr.’s Money-Laundering on behalf of the Third Reich before and after World
War II are available at a linked website, along with commentary by John
Buchanan, who located the documentation. This material is discussed in FTR#435.
The website containing the documents is www.debatecomics.org/BushFamilyFortune/.
Summary of FTR#543—(Note: The massive
volume of ‘For The Record’ programs about 9/11 and related topics is summarized
and analyzed in the periodically-updated description for FTR#391.
FTR#’s 454,
455, 456 are compilations of
much of the key documentation culled from Mr. Emory’s investigation into 9/11.
Along with FTR#391, they should give
listeners/readers a substantive grasp of this momentous event. It is
recommended that listeners use this description and e-mail it to others.) This program analyzes the controversies surrounding the acquisition of
an important seaport-management company by a Dubai firm and the publication by
a Danish newspaper of cartoons portraying the Prophet Mohammed. (In Islam, it
is sacrilegious to craft an image of the prophet Mohammed.) Both issues have
focused attention on the question of real or alleged discrimination against
Muslims. In fact, there is much more to the issues than has been popularly
represented. Dubai (and the United Arab Emirates of which it is a part) have
been profoundly associated with Osama bin Laden and his milieu, in addition to
being the primary port of transit for the A.Q. Khan nuclear smuggling network.
The fundamental issue in the Dubai Ports World controversy is one of national
security versus the dictates of economic globalization. As was the case with
the Axis powers of World War II, the very real malevolence of the
Islamofascists toward the United States is viewed by the US corporate elite as
secondary in importance to the economic ties between the Arab oil-producing
nations and the American firms that benefit from contracts in this country and
the Middle East. (The old anti-fascist books available on the Spitfire website and the descriptions
of those books discuss the conflict between American security and globalized
economic corporate relationships in detail.) The core issue in the Dubai ports controversy is similar to that in the
Ptech investigation. The hunger on the part of the heavily-indebted US public
and private sectors for investment by the petrodollar-gorged Arab economies has
led to the formation of deadly relationships. Ptech is a software firm that developed
the threat-assessment software architecture for the Air Force and Department of
Defense. PTECH IS A COMPANY THAT, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES IS RUN BY THE
MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, AL QAEDA AND THE PEOPLE AND INSTITUTIONS AT THE CORE OF THE
ISLAMIST FINANCING APPARATUS. The anomalous performance of air-defense units on
9/11/2001 is almost certainly due to Ptech’s efforts. Nonetheless, because of
the economic relationships between rich Arab oil producers and capital-hungry
institutions in the U.S., the Ptech case and Operation Green Quest
investigations have languished. (For
more about Ptech, see FTR#’s 462, 464.)
The “Cartoongate” imbroglio has also been misrepresented. The available
evidence suggests that elements associated with the Islamofascist Muslim
Brotherhood deliberately distorted the issue in order to inflame Muslim public
opinion. An important question is whether, perhaps, the incident was
designed to further the Islamofascist agenda endorsed by the Muslim Brotherhood
as outlined in FTR#537.) It is noteworthy that European neo-fascist
elements that exploited the Cartoongate controversy in order to exacerbate
anti-Muslim xenophobia in Europe have maintained professional associations with
the Islamofascist Muslim Brotherhood elements that have fanned the flames of
opinion on the other side of the issue.
Program Highlights Include: The
extraordinary secrecy surrounding the Dubai Ports World deal; Dubai’s support
for the Taliban while they were sheltering Osama bin Laden; the UAE’s role in
laundering money for the 9/11 attacks; Dubai’s central position in the
smuggling of nuclear technology; connections between the leaders of the UAE and
Osama bin Laden; the issue of the effect of the Dubai port controversy on
global capital flows; Danish Muslim leader Abu-Laban’s probable membership in
the Muslim Brotherhood; Abu-Laban’s distribution of deliberate lies about
Denmark; Abu-Laban’s distribution of provocative cartoons of Muhammad that were not published in the Danish
newspaper; the neo-Nazi Republican party’s exploitation of the Cartoongate
controversy; the association between Republican party leader (and SS officer)
Franz Schonhuber and Bank Al Taqwa director Achmed Huber; the links between
Huber and Holocaust denier David Irving; neo-fascist and Islamofascist
promotion of the “Fatherland” concept; an Iranian paper’s Holocaust denial cartoon
contest.
1.
In the controversy surrounding the Dubai Ports World acquisition of
port managing company P&O, many have overlooked the fact that P&O is in
charge of the containers that pass into the United States. Those containers
would make an ideal shipping vehicle for the entry into the U.S. of a weapon of
mass destruction. Although other aspects of seaport security would continue to
be handled by U.S. institutions, only a very small percentage of containers
entering into the United States are inspected. With the experience of Ptech
behind us (see above), allowing a Dubai company to handle such a sensitive role
is very unwise. As will be seen below, Dubai has been a less than reliable ally
with regard to terrorism and related matters. “ . . . P&O’s role is to manage dockside
terminals, usually alongside rival operators such as Maersk. This gives the
company control over the containers that pass through its facilities but all
cargo is subject to security checks by the U.S. Coast Guard and Customs. . . .”
(“Calmer Voices Drowned Out by Rhetoric on Security Threat” by
Andrew Ward, Stephanie Kirchgaessner and Edward Alden; The Financial Times; 2/13/2006; p.4.)
2.
Exemplifying the conflict between the dictates of economic
globalization and the need for security, the deal with Dubai Ports World would
afford that company an extraordinary degree of secrecy and freedom from
scrutiny by American officials. “With the Bush administration, it’s important to have in
mind the old carnival congame. Keep your eye on the shell with the pea under
it. Among the many curious aspects of the administration’s approval of the
Dubai Ports World takeover of operations at six major ports (and as many as 21)
is this exemption from normally routine restrictions. The agreement does not require DP World to keep copies of its business
records on U.S. soil, which would place them within the jurisdiction of
American courts. Nor does it require the company to designate an American
citizen to accommodate requests by the government. [Italics are Mr. Emory’s.]
So what’s that about? . . . .” (“A Flood of Business Exemptions” by
Molly Ivins: San Francisco Chronicle;
3/2/2006; p. B9.)
3.
In addition to the extraordinary degree of secrecy afforded Dubai Ports
World in the agreement, the actual negotiating process itself was conducted
largely in secret. Again, the fundamental conflict between the need for
national security and the dictates of economic globalization are at the core of
the debate about Dubai Ports World. “ . . . Most Americans had no idea that our government’s
process of approving foreign takeovers of American companies through the
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States was entirely secret. When
Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y., asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff
about the Dubai Ports deal at a hearing on Feb. 15, Chertoff declined to answer
because the committee’s work was ‘classified.’ Treasury Secretary John Snow
told another congressional committee that he was not permitted to discuss
specific transactions considered by the foreign investment panel. . . .” (“Sea
Change in Bush Credibility” by E.J. Dionne, Jr.; San Francisco Chronicle; 2/24/2006; p. B11.)
4.
Among the details that emerged in the controversy was the fact that the
U.S. Coast Guard had profound reservations about the wisdom of the deal. There
is abundant reason for that, as will be seen below. “The U.S. Coast Guard, in charge of
reviewing security at ports operated by a Dubai maritime company, warned the
Bush administration it could not rule out that the company’s assets could be
used for terrorist operations, according to a document released Monday by a
Senate committee. Dubai Ports World plans to complete its takeover of
London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. (P&O) on
Thursday, assuming ownership of operations at six major U.S. ports even as it
pledges to hold off on asserting control while the Bush administration reviews
the national security implications of the deal. The White House has strongly
argued that a preliminary review showed that the sale would pose no threat to
national security.” (“Coast
Guard Issued Warning on Dubai Firm” by Jonathan Weisman [Washington Post]; San
Francisco Chronicle; 2/28/2006; p. A3.)
5.
The “gaps” the Coast Guard feared are noteworthy, in light of the
Islamist relationship to elements of the Dubai power elite and the shipping
secrecy with which Dubai prides itself. “ . . . But in a Dec. 13 intelligence assessment of the
company and its owners in the United Arab Emirates, the Coast Guard warned:
‘There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O
assets to support terrorist operations, that preclude’ the completion of a
thorough threat assessment of the merger. ‘The breadth of the intelligence gaps
also infer potential unknown threats against a large number of potential vulnerabilities,’
says the document, released by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs Committee. . . .” (Idem.)
6.
Next, the program sets forth the numerous reasons why the Dubai Ports
World deal was a really, really BAD idea—a bad idea supported enthusiastically
by George Bush. We should not fail to take note of the fact that Bush has
numerous and profound connections to the world of big Arab capital. Dubai
backed the Taliban while they were sheltering Osama bin Laden. “ . . . Yeah, I
know, to be the least bit queasy about turning over our ports to guys who
supported the Taliban when that bunch of religious maniacs were harboring bin
Laden is, as the Bush apologists tell us, just xenophobic. Dubai was not alone,
Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, did the same, and they are now trusted allies. These
are crazy times, and there are some unnerving oddities in Bush’s foreign
policy, but don’t worry. As soon as Hussein is tried and hanged, democracy will
flower in the Arab world and the war on terrorism will be over. . . .” (“Dubious
Dubai Deal” by Robert Scheer; San
Francisco Chronicle; 3/1/2006; p. B11.)
7.
Dubai was also a major transshipment point for Al Qaeda heroin
shipments leaving Afghanistan. As we will see below, the stunningly loose
regulations on the destinations of cargo going through Dubai ports facilitated
this kind of illicit traffic. “ . . . Cargo planes fly twice a week between the southern
Afghan city of Kandahar and Dubai, one of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
According to the Boston Globe,
3/26/2001; these planes fly south with drugs. The Financial Times, 3/24/2001; reported a claim ‘that, at least up
until six months ago, two flights a week were traveling from Dubai to Kandahar,
Mr. bin Laden’s Afghan base, with boxes of dollar bills. . . .” (“Al-Qaeda,
the Taliban, the Northern Alliance, and Drug-Trafficking” by Peter Dale Scott;
accessed at: http://ist-socrates.berkeley/edu/~pdscott/93.html)
8.
In addition to the fact that UAE leaders were associating with bin
Laden as recently as 1999, that association appears to have played a role in
frustrating a cruise missile strike against bin Laden. “The United States raised concerns with the
United Arab Emirates seven years ago about possible ties between officials in
that country and Osama bin Laden, according to a section of the Sept. 11
commission’s report that details a possible missed opportunity to kill the al
Qaeda leader. The commission’s report released last year also raised concerns
UAE officials were directly associating with bin Laden as recently as 1999. The
report states U.S. intelligence believed that bin Laden was visiting an area in
the Afghan desert in February 1999 near a hunting camp used by UAE officials,
and that the U.S. military planned a missile strike. Intelligence from local
tribal sources indicated that ‘bin Laden regularly went from his adjacent camp
to the larger camp where he visited the Emiratis,’ the report said.” (“Report
Links Country, bin Laden” by Elizabeth White [AP]; San Francisco Chronicle; 2/24/2006; p. A4.)
9.
“The missile
attack was never launched, and bin Laden moved on, the report said. A month
later, top White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke ‘called a UAE
official to express his concerns about possible associations between Emirati
officials and bin Laden,’ the report said. At a hearing of the Senate Armed
Services Committee on Thursday, Sen. Carl Levin, the ranking Democrat, asked
Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt if he was aware of the 9/11
commission’s assertion that the United Arab Emirates represents ‘a persistent
counterterrorism problem for the United States.’ Kimmitt replied that
administration figures involved in the decision to approve the deal ‘looked
very carefully’ at information from the intelligence community. ‘Just raise
your hand if anybody talked to the 9/11 commission,’ Levin told the
administration representatives at the witness table. Nobody raised a hand.” (Idem.)
10.
Not only did some of the money laundered to finance the 9/11 attacks
pass through Dubai, but that country was the conduit for much of the nuclear
technology that was trafficked by the A.Q. Khan network. “ . . . What kind of empire are we if we have
to outsource our coastline to a group of sheiks who don’t recognize Israel, in
a country where money was laundered for the 9/11 attacks? And that let A.Q.
Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist, smuggle nuclear components through its
port to Libya, North Korea and Iran? It’s mind-boggling that President Bush
ever agreed to let an alliance of seven emirs be in charge of six of our ports.
Although, as usual, Incurious George didn’t even know about it until after the
fact. (Neither did Rummy, even though he heads one of the agencies that
green-lighted the deal.) . . . .” (“G.O.P. to W.: You’re Nuts!” by
Maureen Dowd; The New York Times;
2/22/2006; p. A23.)
11.
The laxity of the Dubai
regulations on shipping and exporting are stunning! Bear in mind that the
material shipped in this case was nuclear
contraband!! (For more about the A.Q. Khan network, see—among other
programs—FTR#395, 450, 524.)“. . . Why ship through Dubai? Because it may
be the easiest place in the world to mask the real destination of cargo.
Consider how the Malaysian government is making the case for the innocence of
its manufacturing company. ‘No document was traced that proved’ the company
‘delivered or exported the said components to Libya,’ according to the
country’s inspector general of police. The real destination, he said, ‘was
outside the knowledge’ of the producer. One can be certain that if the Khan
ring’s European suppliers are ever tracked down, they will offer a similar
explanation. Dubai provides companies and governments a vital asset: automatic
deniability. Its customs agency even brags that its policy on re-exporting
‘enables traders to transit their shipments through Dubai without any hassles.’
Next to Dubai’s main port is the Jebel Ali free trade zone, a haven for
freewheeling international companies. . . .” (“Nukes
‘R’ Us” by Gary Milhollin and Kelly Motz; The
New York Times; 3/4/2004; p. 2; accessed at: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/04/opinion/04MILH.html?ex+1079471778&ei+1&en=0129a4fd49eeafa0
.)
12.
Addressing the core consideration with regard to the Dubai Ports World
deal, Treasury Secretary John Snow noted the fact that the deal might very well
hurt the US economy by slowing or interdicting the flow of recycled
petrodollars back into the [otherwise bankrupt] US economy. As noted above,
this critical aspect of economic globalization places the US between a rock and
a hard place—between terror and economic destruction. “A rejection by lawmakers of Dubai Ports
World’s agreed acquisition of US container terminals would send a signal that
foreign investments ‘from certain parts of the world aren’t welcome,’ John
Snow, the Treasury secretary yesterday. . . .Washington insiders were left to
guess yesterday whether the White House or some of the most prominent lawmakers
in Congress, including top Republicans in the House and Senate, would be the
first to compromise on the issue after President George W. Bush warned on
Tuesday that he would veto any legislative effort to block the deal. In the
meantime, DP World has been buying shares in P&O heavily this week as a
show of confidence that the deal will not be derailed despite problems in
Washington and the strong likelihood that the deal will face a series of local
battles with port authorities. An agreement to complete the transaction is due
to be approved by a London court on Monday. . . .” (“Dubai Backlash
‘Will Deter Foreign Investors’” by Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Holly Yeager and
Robin Wright; The Financial Times;
2/23/2006; p. 4.)
13.
Arabs have been rattling economic sabres over the rejection of the
Dubai Ports World deal. In addition to the threat of reducing the reinvestment
of petrodollars into the US economy, the Arabs have suggested that US business
interests might not get contracts for the burgeoning infrastructure expansion
being driven by the rise in oil prices. “ . . . David Hamod, NUSACC’s president, said the DP World
saga had intervened just as Arab interest in the US market was picking up again
and students and businessmen, deterred by visa restrictions against Arab
nationals after the 2001 attacks on Washington and New York, had begun
returning in greater numbers. US companies in the region are also worried they
may be penalized at a time that Arab states, flush with petrodollars, have
initiated huge infrastructure projects. A group of US businesses from the Gulf
took out an advertisement in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call this week expressing solidarity with DP World. ‘My
concern is that US companies may not be invited to bid or if they are invited
they will be dealt with more skeptically than in the past,’ with Mr. Hamod. That
concern seems to have some foundation, with government officials in the region
indignant that DP World has been singled out for scrutiny because of its Arab
origins. One senior official in Qatar, which like the UAE is a strong ally of
the US, said the backlash in Congress’had raised a lot of questions.’ These
include the possibility that American companies investing in the region might
race the same kind of scrutiny as DP World in the US. Naguib Sawiris, chairman
of Egypt’s telecoms multinational Orascom, said ‘This could hinder US firms who
want to do acquisitions in the Middle East. You know, if you don’t allow us, we
won’t allow you.’” (“Ports Backlash Makes Arab Investors Wary” by
William Wallis; The Financial Times;
3/2/2006; p. 6.)
14.
One of the more disgustingly predictable derivatives of the Ports World
scandal is the litany coming out of certain Arab circles that the rejection of
the deal represents bigotry against Arabs. Not
wanting to be killed does not represent bigotry! Those who resort to this
shallow rhetorical gambit are overlooking the disturbing evidence about the
Dubai/Islamist terror connection discussed above. “The political furor over the Bush
administration’s plan to have an Arab company take over operations in several
U.S. ports has frustrated Arab and Muslim Americans, who fear the opposition is
fueled by racism and bigotry. ‘We’re very concerned about the level of rhetoric
and the way that there seems to be the assumption that because a company is
Arab it can’t be trusted with our security,’ said Katherine Abbadi, head of the
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee of New York. . . .” (“Arabs,
Muslims Sense Bigotry in Port Dispute” by Deepti Hajela [AP]; San Francisco Chronicle; 2/24/2006; p.
A5.)
15.
Making a transition to discussion of the controversy surrounding the
publication of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad by a Danish newspaper, the
broadcast cites a London Times editorial
noting the politicization of Islam. “It looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and flies like a
duck. And yet it insists that it is not a duck. This is the image that comes to
mind when watching those anti-cartoon marches in western capitals, including
London, in the name of Islam. Isn’t Islam supposed to be a religion? Shouldn’t
it be concerned with the broader issues of human existence rather than with a
set of cartoons, a Dutch television documentary, the head-covers of French
schoolgirls or a novel by a British-Indian author? Today the visible Islam, the
loudest Islam, is a political movement masquerading as a religion. Many mosques
in this country have been transformed into political clubs where Kashmir, Iraq
and Palestine and ‘the misdeeds of Anglo-Saxon imperialism’ have replaced
issues of religious faith as the principal theme. . . .” (“Focus:
‘We Don’t Do God, We Do Palestine and Iraq’”; London Times; 2/12/2006; accessed at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk.)
16.
A Wall Street Journal article
sets forth the fundamentals of the “Cartoongate” scandal. “ . . . The cartoon uproar has fed on wider
racial and economic tension in Europe between Muslim immigrants and native
citizens. Also at play is America’s policy of promoting democracy, which has
helped unleash a struggle within the Arab world between largely secular regimes
and increasingly powerful Islamist groups. In this volatile environment, a
group of Danish Islamic clerics angered by the cartoons succeeded in enlisting
help from Egypt’s secular government, which has been struggling to contain a
potent Islamist opposition. Secular forces in the Arab world, eager to burnish
their image as defenders of Islam, provided an important initial impetus for
the protests, but now are scrambling to control the fury. From his office at
the Islamic Faith Society in Copenhagen, Ahmed Abu-Laban, a fundamentalist
Palestinian cleric, has been at the forefront of a campaign to force an apology
from the paper. ‘This was the last drop in a cup of resentment, disappointment
and exploitation,’ he says.” (“How Muslim Clerics Stirred Arab World
Against Denmark” by Andrew Higgins; The
Wall Street Journal; 2/7/2006; p. A1.)
17.
“Jyllands-Posten, a center-right
newspaper, first waded into these treacherous waters last fall. Mr. Rose,
alarmed by what he considered a rise in self-censorship relating to Islamic
issues, invited Danish cartoonists to ‘draw Muhammad the way that they see
him.’ Twelve submitted drawings. One mocked a far-right Danish leader, putting
her in a police line-up with a turban, and another ridiculed Mr. Rose and his
newspaper, labeling it a ‘reactionary provocateur.’ Others, though, poked fun
at Islam. One depicted Muhammad in a turban shaped like a bomb. Another showed
a turbaned figure in heaven telling ascending suicide bombers to stop because
‘we’ve run out of virgins,’ a reference to a reward said to await Islamic
martyrs. The cartoons were published Sept. 30, which Mr. Rose and his
colleagues were unaware coincided with the start of the Muslim holy month of
Ramadan. Soon after the angry newspaper vendor called, a second-generation
immigrant phoned the paper to make threats against the cartoonists. The caller,
who was quickly found by police, turned out to be mentally ill. After a few
days, Mr. Rose though the worst was over. Then clerics in Copenhagen and
elsewhere used their sermons to denounce the paper. Ambassadors from Egypt,
Saudi Arabia and nine other Islamic countries requested a meeting with
Denmark’s center-right prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Mr. Rasmussen
declined, saying the state had no right to interfere with the country’s free
press. Angry local Muslim leaders organized rallies demanding an apology. The
paper refused. . . .” (Idem.)
18.
A brief biographical sketch of Mr. Abu-Laban suggests the distinct
possibility that he is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Note that he invited
Sheikh Rahman to speak at an event in Denmark, placing Abu Laban in the Al
Qaeda milieu. (For more about the Muslim Brotherhood, see—among other programs—FTR#’s 343, 454, 455, 456, 473, 537, 540.) “ . . . Mr. Abu-Laban, who grew up in Egypt and was arrested there in the early 1980’s after
being expelled from the United Arab Emirates for his preaching, took charge of writing
statements for the group and communicating with Muslim ambassadors. He denies
holding extremist views, but acknowledges hosting visits to Denmark by Omar
Abdel Rahman, before his arrest in New York, where the blind sheik now is
serving a life sentence in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
[Italics are Mr. Emory’s.]. . .” (Idem.)
19.
A critical detail of “Cartoongate” concerns the fact that the cartoons
and text circulated in the [largely illiterate] Muslim World were in accurate.
Many of the cartoons of Muhammad were deliberately insulting and provocative
and were NOT published in Mr. Rose’s
paper. Some of the cartoons may have been sent by white supremacists and
neo-Nazis to deliberately inflame tensions. As will be seen below, there are
operational links between elements of the Muslim Brotherhood and European Nazi
and fascist elements. “ . . . From several sources, we now know that word of the
cartoons was then carried systematically through the Muslim world—to principal
mosques, madrassahs, and government offices starting in Egypt. This was done by
delegations sent by Ahmed Abu-Laban, the Saudi-supported
Imam of Copenhagen. And in addition
to the dozen cartoons that had actually appeared in that obscure provincial
newspaper—most fairly innocent, and one actually satirizing opposition to
Islam—the delegations’ ‘media kits’ included as many as 30 graphics that had
never appeared, and by their nature would never appear, in a Western mainstream
newspaper. For instance, a photo of a man dressed as a pig, over the caption,
‘This is the real Mohammad.’ The fake pictures not only outnumbered the real
ones, they were much nastier. Many were in the style of anti-Semitic cartoons
that appear frequently in Arab papers, but turned around to target Muslims
instead of Jews. And the covering letter, which I have read in translation, was
full of outrageous lies about events in Denmark, and misrepresentations of what
had been said by Danish journalists and politicians. [Italics are Mr.
Emory’s.]” (“Organized Apoplexy” by David Warren; Ottawa Citizen; 2/8/2006; accessed at: http://www.davidwarrenonline.com)
20.
“It is this
document, and not any copy of Jyllands-Posten
from Sept. 30th 2005, that is at the root of the Muslim riots, the
Saudi-sponsored p[an-Arab boycott of Danish goods, and various fatwas and other
acts that put Danes and other Europeans, who had never previously hears of Jyllands-Posten, in peril for their
lives. . . .” (Idem.)
21.
“ . . . For the
whole point of this exercise is to enhance the power and prestige of radical
Islam, over the great number of Muslims who have not been looking for trouble.
Simply by recognizing the least reasonable Muslim voices as the legitimate
representatives of Islam, terrible damage is done to moderate interests. It is
utterly wrong to appease an Abu-Laban. Here is a man who gave an interview on
Danish television, pretending great distress, and condemning the excesses of
the international campaign against Danish persons, property, and products. But he also gave an interview to Al-Jazeera,
in Arabic, cheerfully congratulating the world’s Muslims on putting a scare
into the Danes, and gloating over the success of the boycott. Alas for him,
the Danish television network, DR, has now shown excerpts from the Al-Jazeera
interview, translated into Danish. This has to be spelled out very plainly to
people in the West who don’t get it, including ignorant scribes in the U.S.
State Department, the British Foreign Office, and the Vatican, who have added
their official voices in condemnation of those irrelevant Danish cartoons.
Every time we refuse a radical Muslim demand, by sticking to our sound Western
principles, we strengthen reasonable Muslims against the fanatics. Every time
we relent, we strengthen the fanatics.” (Idem.)
22.
A very sage observation indeed was made by a Pakistani man—the father
of an op-ed columnist in The New York
Times. The extremists on both sides of the Muhammad cartoons issue should
not be seen as constituting the primary element of their respective social
groups. As we will see, the two extremes are working together! “ . . . ‘Listen,’
said my father. ‘The most important thing here is not to confuse a group within
an entity for the entity itself. Europeans, Muslims, European Muslims—most
people just want to live in peace. For us to start believing Europe is
represented by its right-wing fanatics would be as wrong as for them to believe
Islam is represented by our right-wing fanatics.’ . . .” (“Agent
Provacateur’ by Kamila Shamsie; The New
York Times; 2/15/2006; p. A23.)
23.
The German Republikaner Partei, headed up by SS officer Franz
Schonhuber, exploited the Cartoongate affair to promote racism and xenophobia. “ . . .
Highlighting the risk of escalation, the German extreme-right Republican Party
said in a statement yesterday that the outrage marked ‘the beginning of open
war between cultures in Europe,’ adding: ‘the door is now open for blackmail by
the Mohammedans.’ . . .” (“Muslim Outrage Gathers Pace” by Bertrand
Benoit and FT Reporters; The Financial
Times; 2/3/2006; accessed at: http://news.ft.com.)
24.
Next, the program revisits a point of information discussed in—among
other programs—FTR#’s 378, 456. In the spring of
2002, bank Al Taqwa director Achmed Huber networked with other American and
European fascists and far rightists, including Gianfranco Fini, head of the
Italian Alleanza Nationale. (For more on Huber, see—among other programs—FTR#’s 343, 354, 357, 359, 377, 456.) In addition to Huber
and Fini, the meeting was attended by SS officer Franz Schonhuber, the head of
the Republican Party that exploited the Cartoongate scandal! Another in
attendance was Jean Marie Le Pen, head of the fascist Front National in
France—a party that exploits anti-Muslim sentiment for political gain. It is
important to note that this meeting places the head of the Republican Party at
a meeting with a director of the Bank Al Taqwa, the chief financial vehicle of
the Muslim Brotherhood!! As discussed in FTR#’s
371, 456, 498, 499, Huber has served as a
key liaison man between European and American white supremacists and neo-Nazis
and Islamists. The two groups are united in their anti-Semitic and
anti-American sentiments and in their pursuit of the “Fatherland” concept. The
latter is a doctrine that holds that neo-fascists would achieve power in Europe
and North America and that Islamofascists come to control the Muslim world.
After this bipolar accession to power, all of the Muslims would return to their
countries of origin and all of the white people would live in European and
North American countries. After that, presumably, everyone would live happily
ever after. “Perhaps
the most recent remarkable story concerning Huber comes from a brief item in
the Swiss tabloid Blick that in an
April 26, 2002 article by Alexander Sautter that Huber was involved in a
meeting of far-right leaders from Europe. A photo showing Huber with Jean Marie
Le Pen accompanies the article. The Blick
story (available on the web) is as follows: ‘Mon Pelerin VD: Christian
Cambuzat, the promoter (Scharfmacher)
of the right extremist Jean-Marie Le Pen (73): The guru assembles together some
of the top leaders of the European right. On the idyllic Mont Pelerin, they
debate their crude ideas. At his secret visit to a spa in Switzerland, Le Pen
hardly remained alone. Rightist leaders from all over Europe traveled to meet
the extremist presidential candidate who was hosted by Cambuzat. Franz
Schonhuber (79). Founder of the Republican Party in Germany and a former member
of the SS. He talked with Le Pen who constitutes together with Schonhuber the
‘Front National’ Faction in the European parliament. Gianfranco Fini (50).
Italian post-fascist, Mussolini admirer, and founder of the Alleanze Nationale.
He also was at the meeting with Le Pen and Schonhuber. Ahmed Huber (74). The
Swiss is on the Bush Administration blacklist . . . ‘I met le Pen at Mont
Pelerin as he went to Christian Cambuzat’s spa,’ Huber told Blick yesterday. At
the extremist rendezvous an American far right politician was also supposed to
have taken part. [Note: the American is not further identified.—KC] Christian
Cambuzat said that Le Pen (after the election) had again become the sharpest
weapon of the ‘Front National’ because Le Pen changed his image from a venomous
old man to a ‘kindly U.S. TV evangelist.’ Proudly Cambuzat brags, ‘With me Le
Pen can relax well’ [from his political endeavors—KC]. And openly link up with
new contacts. [Although the Blick story
does not give details, Cambuzat runs a spa for the very rich, the Lemanique de
Revitalisation, inside a hotel on the famous Mont Pelerin.]’” (“Report on Islamists, The Far Right, and Al
Taqwa” by Kevin Coogan; pp. 14-15; available at: www.oraclesyndicate.org/pub_e/k.coo_e/publ_09-02_1.htm.)
25.
Interestingly, Huber maintains close relations with Holocaust deniers
like David Irving, recently convicted of Holocaust denial in Europe. “ . . . In
Germany, he [Huber] speaks often at events hosted by the neo-Nazi National
Democratic Party, which publicly welcomed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Huber
also befriended British author David Irving and other Holocaust deniers while
frequenting ‘Revisionist’ conclaves. . . .” (“The Swastika & the
Crescent” by Martin A. Lee; Intelligence
Report; Spring 2002 [#105]; Published by the Southern Poverty Law Center;
p. 1; accessed at: http://www.splcenter.org/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=132)
26.
A telling outgrowth of the Cartoongate affair was an Iranian
newspaper’s sponsorship of a cartoon contest lampooning the Holocaust. That
this would be seen as an appropriate response to the publication of images of
Mohammed is significant. With the Iranian president himself having called the
Holocaust a myth, the Iranian response is strongly suggestive of the notion
that Jews dominate and secretly run Western society. This belief is very
widespread in the Muslim world. In this context, one should also note that
Huber is very close to the Iranian regime. “An Iranian newspaper’s contest for Holocaust-related
cartoons has drawn entries from 200 people, with some drawings mocking the
World War II slaughter: One entry shows Jews going into a gas pipeline. Most
contest entrants are Iranian, but six are Americans and a few cartoons have been
submitted from such places as Indonesia and Brazil, according to the Hamshahri newspaper. A few of the
drawings have been posted online. Hamshahri
began the contest last month as a test of the West’s readiness to print
cartoons about the Nazi killing of 6 million Jews in World War II. The contest,
which runs through May 15, comes in response to caricatures of the prophet
Muhammad that sparked protests across much of the Muslim world. . . .” (“Holocaust
Cartoon Contest Draws 200” by Nasser Karimi [AP]; The San Francisco Chronicle; 3/14/2006;
p. A7.)