 |
 |
|
|
"More Moslems came, and soon a small mosque was built, which attracted yet others. As long as Zoroastrians remained in the majority, their lives were tolerable; but once the Moslems became the more numerous, a petty but pervasive harassment was apt to develop. This was partly verbal, with taunts about fire-worship, and comments on how few Zoroastrians there were in the world, and how many Moslems, who must therefore posses the truth; and also on how many material advantages lay with Islam. The harassment was often also physical; boys fought, and gangs of youth waylaid and bullied individual Zoroastrians. They also diverted themselves by climbing into the local tower of silence and desecrating it, and they might even break into the fire-temple and seek to pollute or extinguish the sacred flame. Those with criminal leanings found too that a religious minority provided tempting opportunities for theft, pilfering from the open fields, and sometimes rape and arson. Those Zoroastrians who resisted all these pressures often preferred therefore in the end to sell out and move to some other place where their co-religionists were still relatively numerous, and they could live at peace; and so another village was lost to the old faith."
Boyce, A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism, pp. 7-8;
Unofficial trailer a non-author made
Text from the trailer:
The Shoebat Foundation Presents God’s War on Terror, an extensive research on what the Bible predicts regarding the rise and fall of Islam.
Can you imagine living at the time just prior to Jesus' first coming? Being there and knowing well the correct interpretation of ancient prophecies?
Or can you imagine being told by Daniel the prophet that a particular star would point you to the coming King of Kings?
You would know what to prepare for and how to be ready for the coming King of Kings.
You might say that these events have come and gone.
Well?
What about His second coming?
We await Christ, they [the Muslims] await the Mahdi.
The Mahdi brings a 7 year peace treaty.
The Antichrist brings a 7 year peace treaty.
Mahdi will change times and laws
Antichrist will change set times and laws
Mahdi will rule from the Temple Mount
Antichrist rules from the Temple Mount
Islam does not honor women's rights
Antichrist does not honor women's rights
Muslims honor Allah with gold and silver (Zaka)
Antichrist honors his god with gold and silver
Mahdi honors Allah, a god of war
Antichrist honors a god of fortresses (war)
Mahdi advances Allah's cause through war
Antichrist will advance his god by war
Islam beheads Christians
Mahdi will demand a badge on the forehead
Antichrist demands badge on forehead
American Christians think the Antichrist comes from the West
We say he comes from the East
Which one is right?
We, Christians from the East can provide thousands of biblical references to prove our point.
Can you?
Quran - Source Of Islamic Terrorism
About The Islamic End Time Paradigm
Parallels between Islam and Jewish/Christian End Time Biblical Prophecy
The Uselessness of Journalists
Books - Books To Read
Videos - View various playlists of on-line videos related to Islam and Jihad
Blogs - Blogs I Recommend
The Rage and The Pride - Oriana Fallaci (Sept 2001)
The Rage, the Pride, and the Doubt - Oriana Fallaci (Mar 2003)
The Soliloquy of Dakel Abbas - Oriana Fallaci (Apr 2003)
What Motivates Muslims To Kill Through Suicide
Islam 101 - Explains what Islam is exactly and how Muslims view their faith
What Americans Should Know About Jihad
Islamic Time Capsule - ISLAM in Time Magazine. 1923 - 1967 (See how Islam recovers from the destruction of the Caliphate)
The People Who Did This Believe in Their Heart That God Desires Them To Do This
Threats Iran have made against the United States
No Substitute For Victory - IMPORTANT - (Source)
Interesting clip about Iraq war strategy
Quotes of Democrats Supporting the Iraq War on WMD grounds
The original ABC News report you linked to was from January 1999, I believe, and not 2000. The report was similar to numerous accounts in the worldwide press following Operation Desert Fox. That Clinton-ordered air campaign lasted from December 16 to December 19, 1998. Its purpose was to degrade Saddam's WMD and intelligence capabilities. Reports from more recent years indicate that the campaign nearly plunged Saddam's regime into chaos. In any event, Saddam's response was telling. Just two days after Operation Desert Fox ended he dispatched one of his top intelligence operatives, Faruq Hijazi, to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. As I and others have written, Hijazi was no low-level flunky. He was one of Saddam's most trusted goons and was responsible for overseeing a good deal of the regime's terrorist and other covert activities. It was this meeting that led to widespread reporting on the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. I collected a bunch of these reports, including the ABC News report, in "The Four-Day War." Another, earlier piece also discusses Saddam's conspicuous response to Operation Desert Fox.
The consensus in the media then was that there was a relationship between the two and that Saddam's regime was very willing to work with al Qaeda against their common foe: America. And vice versa. Indeed, the reporting indicated that they had been working together even long before Operation Desert Fox.
The reports from late 1998 and early 1999 are tough for naysayers to explain away for a variety of reasons, but that hasn't stopped them from trying. For example, last year's Senate Intelligence Report on Iraq's ties to al Qaeda (the report was written, primarily, by a former John Kerry for President campaigner) unhesitatingly cited Hijazi's testimony, in which he claimed that he did not meet with bin Laden again after a lone incident in the mid 1990's. The Senate Intelligence report did not cite any of the voluminous reporting, by ABC News and other outlets, following the meeting in December 1998. Obviously, that reporting demonstrates Hijazi is a liar. I asked the Senate Intelligence Committee's staff about this after the report came out. They said they didn't have any evidence that contradicted Hijazi's testimony and that is why they cited it unquestioningly. I think that is a good demonstration of the ignorance or bias or both that clouds this issue.
Of course, at the same time that the worldwide media was reporting all of this, various CIA and National Security Council officials were watching as well. Thus, Richard Clarke worried in February 1999 about bin Laden's possible "boogie to Baghdad." A month earlier he defended intelligence tying Saddam's VX nerve gas program to a suspected al Qaeda front company in Sudan. Michael Scheuer also at one time found it convenient to cite some of this evidence. In his original 2002 edition of Through Our Enemies' Eyes he approvingly cited several of the media's late 1998/early 1999 accounts. Of course, they both now pretend none of this really means anything.
Such is the state of affairs in today's Washington establishment.
