JULY 6TH ***UPDATED TRANSCRIPT*** MORE TO FOLLOW***
I spent the most extraordinary afternoon with Bat Ye'or. I am overwhelmed. Much love and thanks to Andrew Bostom for suggesting it.
Diminutive. powerful, clear -- I hold Bat Ye'or most dear. Her bravery is daunting. The difficulty she faced from "our" side is difficult to grasp. Listen to this brief conversation about the opposition she faced, and the boycotts. Download batyeor_chat.mp3 (Any transcribers out there?)
The Baron transcribed Bat Ye'or's speech in Toronto here.
I am loading, compressing the video now. The bad news? I lost half the video file (don't ask -- I am not tech girl!). I am crestfallen, but I do have 40 minutes of video.
The good news? I have all the audio (just call me backup girl). I will convert the hour into an MP3 file. So not one word was lost. All of the intel is here. Listen to every critical word.
On dhimmitude, the Palestinization of Europe, Sarkozy, Bush, Olmert, Nazis, Moderate Muslims, the weakening of Bush and the failures of the people of Israel .........all of it
Download the interview on my radio show here.
Terrorism must be seen as the ultimate attack on the human being, on human rights and freedom, as a modern expression of physical and intellectual enslavement.
If anyone wants to help transcribe Bat Ye'or's interview with me, please email AtlasShrugs2000 at aol.com.
"The Western media is aligned with the terrorist force"
"The BBC is an enemy of peace"
"The media is responsible for our defeat if there is still a defeat it too early to say...."
"we are in a new age....we are new an age of Global jihad"
POSTED JULY 1, 2007 5:03 pm. UPDATED Transcript JULY 6th
UPDATE: Magnus transcribes the video! Pim's Ghost does the really heavy lifting on the audio.
CLICK BELOW FOR FULL TRANCRIPT.
I cannot thank Pim's Ghost enough for doing yeoman's work in transcribing the interview. I am forever in her debt (as are you).
BY: Hi Pamela. Nice to see you finally!
PG: So nice to see you!
BY: I know you from your excellent web site. I have seen it and I like everything you do.
PG: Well. I’m feel like I sitting with the pope! My viewer has all read Eurabia. I don’t if you read “The Dhimmi” and “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam“, but these are all books that we must read for the coming fight. No one has been as prescient, sagacious or as brilliant in outlining, or actually substantiating, documenting, meticously the Euro-Arab axis, and how this wave of Islamization. It was no accident. And how fortudies for us that Bat will be here in New York, the capital of the world on, well, independent stay weekend -- we got our little flags on, yeah baby! -- and during this terrible attack over in the UK. So I’m gonna turn it over to you a little bit, and I like to know, firstly, just your background, in Egypt. You were a child in Egypt and what happened?
BY: Yes I grew up in Egypt. I had friends from catholic background, Christians, the Coptic’s -- the ancient Christian community of Egypt -- and of course Muslim friends. And I didn’t felt any restriction. We were all little girls at school, it was a French school, and then suddenly with the emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood and the [sense? frenze?? UNKNOWN time=2:05] they were taken into the society. And also during the second world war, last time we were in danger -- of course it was a [UNKNOWN time=2:13] child at this moment, but nevertheless -- we had a German army at the door of Alexandria, and I remember that my parents knew that Jews were killed by the Nazi and deported into the [implanted? UNKNOWN time=2:25] concentration camps. And during the second world war all the Jews from Egypt flew and vent and hide in the countryside, because we were afraid from the rival of the Nazi. The British army with its soldiers from its colonies were all over the Egypt then. But I remember that in the night we had to run down into shelter. And then, after the victory of the alliance, then started manifestations of Islamic nationalism in Egypt, and Jews felt already in danger. Many left, already by 1945, ‘48. But the British assistance forbidden the emigration of Jews to Palestine. It was very difficult to immigrate to Palestine. And then, in the war ‘47 to ‘48 things went very bad. I was at school then, but I realized that I could not go to school because there was so much manifestation in the street.
Jews were arrested in the street or in their flat. The old Jewish community, it was inhabited by poor people. Then women were raped and men were killed. So many were expelled and in that moment Jews start leaving also. Well, it didn’t start because it started already before, but the Exodus intensified. Then my father … was so frustrated, and he realized that, although I was still at school, that I was really in a way boycotted. [They] always telling me be … don’t speak.
PG: What a way to live!
BY: Yes, we couldn’t listen to the Israeli radio. We had to be careful. We were spied upon by a servant. And then in ‘56, or even before, my nationality was taken away, and many Jews of this time lose their jobs. And they were forbidden to go to some public places. During the ‘56 war, Suez Canal War, my mother who was French was put on [row??? UNKNOWN time=6:08].
PG: Do you think that Eisenhower made a terrible mistake in the Suez, when Nasser grab the Suez.
BY: Yes, of course.
PG: Don’t you think that that was the first major terror attack and that the West capitulated. You had Israel and France, they were on the same side, they said the Suez is ours, we got to take it back, and Eisenhower said no, don’t you think that was a huge mistake?
BY: Yes, it was. Retrospectively it was a mistake. But he was afraid because it was a big communist party in Egypt then. Probably he was afraid for communism.
PG: I just think that there are certain points in history that are pivotal, that are critical, and I think backing down set the tone for future terrorism.
BY: Yes, in a way yes. Especially that a few years later Egypt would have it back, the Suez Canal. Because it was the end of the lease, that they have done it. So it would have come back to Egypt anyway. Nasser has done it as a provocation that he took it. But anyway the whole atmosphere was extremely anti-Semite but also anti-Western and anti-Christian. It was not only against the Jews, and everyone was afraid -- because in Egypt and everywhere in an Arab country you say “after Saturday it is Sunday“, meant when you finished with the Jews you go on against the Christians.
PG: Oh, my God.
BY: Yes, everyone knew that, this was a current saying. I mean, everyone knew, “after Saturday it is Sunday”.
PG: Now, the Muslim Brotherhood was new then?
BY: Well it started in 1922. It was always under control by the state, but later it became stronger and stronger, and it conduct very vile manifestations, assassinations and also bombs and terrorism. So everyone was afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood, but it has millions of people representing a huge number of people, and Nasser himself was afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood.
PG: And here we are today, and there is talk about Bush reaching out to talk to Muslim Brotherhood. What do you think about that?
BY: Well, because there is a policy now which is totally different from before, from the 1970th . The policy is that we don’t want anymore war. And in order to avoid having war we have to speak to the enemy and we have to defuse the conflict through pacific means. This is the policy of Europe.
PG: Do you believe in that?
BY: Well, I think that it goes in a certain way, but if one insist that one can not defuse the conflict, that the enemy will have its way …, like from recent with Hitler-- because this policy was used with Hitler too; appeasement; the appeasement policy -- so it goes until a certain point but no more, because then afterward the conflict will be, anyway, but it will be even more terrible with more victims and more violent.
PG: Now in “Eurabia” you outlined the Euro-Arab axis, that it wasn’t an accident, but there was a deliberate plan, and was the object? What was the objective?
BY: Well, in this book I examined particularly this policy of appeasement that was conducted by Europe, the European community. This time it was the nine countries, and it started in part after the Kippur War in 1973, and it was in fact a French plan. France didn’t want to lose their colonies, and they want to have good relations with their Arab colonies -- you know that France had huge Arab colonies -- and after the Algerian war of liberation they lost all their colonies. They lost Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, the last one. They wanted to have good relations with these countries, and they went along they have tacted. The plan drawn by the Mufti, the Mufti of Jerusalem.
PG: Right, and he was with the Nazis?
BY: He was with the Nazi. There were many Nazi also in Egypt, and Egypt was part, also, of this plan, and the plan was to build up a strong alliance with France and the Arab countries, and against America and against the protestant people.
PG: Now, why against America? As a counter-power?
BY: Yes, first of all as a counter-power, but because America has saved the world from Nazism. It is thanks to America that the dictatorships like fascism, like Nazism were defeated. So America was the big enemy. It was a democratic and it was the big enemy of dictatorship and of the fascism regimes. Now, there were many Nazi people who has immigrated in Egypt and lived in Egypt under the Nasser regime, and of course they were very friendly with the Mufti, so this plan was built up against America and against Israel. Now de Gaulle, who was part of this sought to bring not only France, but the European community. Then the nine countries. Because this time de Gaulle and Germany were building together the European community; the integration.
PG: Yes, the integration, it would eliminate the European countries, so to speak.
BY: Not only that. It would make out of Europe a huge block, because it would not be only France, it would be nine countries allied with twenty-two Arab countries. It would have make a fantastic block which would be more powerful than America, and this was the object, and for the Arabs, not so much for the French although there were many anti-Semites still in France … . France was in ally with the German regime, the German Nazi regime, so it has collaborate in deportation of Jews and extermination of Jews.
PG: But the people in Europe really were not onboard with this, they didn’t know that this was happening.
BY: No, they didn’t know but still there were people who were very favorable to such a position, because from the beginning of the century there was such an anti-Semitic climate in France and in whole of Europe. If it wouldn’t have been, there wouldn’t have been also the genocide of the Jews, if the climate was not so anti-Jewish. And it is not because the American and the ally with the allies’ troop succeeded in crushing down Nazism that all those feelings disappeared from one day to another.
PG: Oh no, it could never happen!
BY: So it has continued under another name, and this was of course the anti-Zionists and the hate of the state of Israel, but it was the same anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism. So what happened then? After the Kippur War, the European countries that were reluctant to follow the French plan accepted, because they were faced with the oil boycott.
PG: Yes, in the 70th.
BY: Yes, and not only that but with Palestinian terrorism which started in 1968 in Europe, in several cities of Europe.
PG: And they handled it very badly.
BY: Yes, and they didn’t know. It was the first time it happened so they didn’t know how to answer on that.
PG: They should have crushed it!
BY: Yes, but how to crush it? They didn’t know, so they thought: “Okay, we’ll go into that plan, we do this appeasement policy“…, because this was the European countries who wants to have good relations with the Arab world, and with the sheikdom, and with the countries now producing so much oil, so they needed oil for their economy. So they say: “Okay, we go into this alliance with the Arab world, and we shall do business with them”, but the Arab league countries put as a condition to open a dialogue with the European countries on two conditions; that Europe will recognize Arafat as the only representative of the Palestinian people and that they will support the PLO, which was a terrorist organization and have a policy contradict to that of America. So they enter into this dialogue.
PG: Yes, … the deal with the devil.
BY: Yes, the deal with the devil. And from that moment Europe changed it policy against Israel, but I think its soul changed because…
PG: Europe's soul changed. That’s important; an important quote.
BY: Yes. Because it has to support the Palestinian war, jihad against Israel.
PG: It has to support barbarism.
BY: Which is support barbarism, which is to support jihad ideology which is, as well, as much anti-Jewish as anti-Christian, and which is legitimized by the evilness of the Jews and Christians or of the infidels also. It is based on that, so when Europe support this and legitimize it intellectually, and also with its heart, its soul and heart support the destruction of the state of Israel, it supported also its own evilness and its own destruction. And since this moment it follows therefore the Palistinization of Europe, of the whole mentality of Europe -- the whole vision and interpretation of history and of events according to the Palestinian vision , which is the eternal evilness of its enemy Israel, which is linked also to the Christian and the West. So Europe destroyed itself. It destroyed its own, first of all, Christianity, and give in to the Palestinians to attack the Christianity in Lebanon. Because the Palestinian war was not only against Israel. The Palestinian, you have to see them as a tool or as an instrument of the Arab world to destroy Israel, and also as a channel to penetrate into Europe and Islamize Europe. It is exactly what they have done.
PG: I understand, but even the word Palestinian is a marketing term. What was really the Palestinians? The Arabs living in Gaza but were Egyptian Arabs.
PG: So they came with this term in 1967. It’s a myth. It’s an Arab narrative.
BY: Yes. You phrase it totally. I think the Palestine and the myth of the Palestinian was created by European; by European anti-Semite, like Jacques Berque, for instance, who is a great islamologue and arabist who is teaching on the Institute Francaise. He’s very well known because he was he champion of this anti-Israeli policy of the French government, but there was others also in England and in other countries. But in Europe the leftist movement… of course the communist were behind the Palestinians, so all the communists and the leftist movement supported the Palestinians, supported this vision because they were anti-American. So at this moment there was a real polarization of the political life in Europe, with the left, the communists, the socialists supporting the Palestinian and the destruction of Israel and the fight against America.
PG: Yes, but there are people, the people of Europe, they don’t like what’s going on. I mean, do you think they can actually, at any point wall off their cities? I mean, this is evolving, this is not static, this is fluid…
BY: Yes. I mean what happen to people, the European people, it is that all this is a policy that was created by networks and went through -- was imposed -- to the European through the universities; through institutes that were created, through media…
PG: It’s America!
BY: Exactly, and with false justification, a mythological justification.
PG: Yes, it’s an Arab narrative.
BY: Yes, with a political agenda, supporting the Palestinians, and whoever would say the contrary, would oppose, would lost his work, would be boycotted, he wouldn’t be able to be published and so on. So this was a censorship also, under reality and on the opposition. Now, what the European people thought of that were many intellectual people saw very well, and many religious also; priests and reverence in the reform churches. They were totally opposed to that, and they fought very strongly against it. They saw it. They saw that the ancient anti-Semitism, which they had so strongly vote against, in the preceding years and the Nazism -- because not everyone that was the anti-Semitical [newhop? UNKNOWN time=24:24]. There were many people who opposed that movement, but they were taken into it and they were prisoners of that. You know, when you see a blockage of everything; you can not write in the newspaper, you can not speak on the television. Your voice is not, has not…
PG: Is silent.
BY: Is silent! They silence you through censorship all the time. But Nevertheless these people fought with whatever possibility there was. So the resistance against anti-Semitism, against anti-Americanism, against this policy was there, but was not listened to; do not appear.
PG: Yes, but I have to ask… The past two days… Now what we’ve seen in New York now clearly is the reality on the ground that you predicted, your sagacity, your prescience, actually your evidence, it wasn’t a conjecture, it was your evidence that you put forth in Eurabia, so now we seen it. It’s coming to prevision, it’s what you said. And here they are yesterday, the two London bombings and we know that it’s jihadis and we know that it’s al Qaeda it has ties to and now Glasgow, and the first thing as it is happening British officials -- government officials -- and the police and the pundits are saying: there’s no responsible, it has nothing to do with religion, this is a couple of crazies. I mean there is a denial. There is a willful denial. Now, I’m asking you, as a the citizens of this country are they looking at this and go “Ah okay, that make sense!”? Because it doesn’t make sense at all.
BY: Yes, but where do you wanting them to do? Do you want people to go against Muslims? And then, what will happen? There will be xenophobic attacks then with a violent reaction, which should not be, because of course there are this Islamist policy which we see, but not everyone are responsible for that. So I know myself absolutely wonderful Muslim people. Now they look Muslim. I will be terribly ashamed if people would go after them and just say “Look what other Muslims have done, so we kill you”, and they are innocent. Because you cannot control mass movement. You have to be very careful. You have to keep the people so they don’t become crazy. You know, we have crazy people among European. Not everyone is rational, and people who takes drugs, people who drinks and suddenly they see… it happen I France, a group of crazy people who saw an Arab …, they don’t like Arabs and they throw him into the Seine, to the river, and he drowned.
PG: No-no, that’s not [UNKNOWN time=27:57].
BY: Because just they don’t like an Arab, and they don’t know who is this Arab. So government has to be -- it is their responsibility -- they have to look for social peace. They have to be very careful. They have to say things that suddenly create a racist movement violent against a whole community.
PG: I agree. The community that is responsible, don’t you think they taking something of a pass? Don’t you think these mosques must be monitored? I mean, I’m totally against the Expo incident. Totally against going after anyone because of the crime of another man. I’m talking about going after the Islamists, the preachers who preach the terror…, but it’s not enough to just be there when a bomb goes off. I mean you got to go to the incubator of hate.
BY: Yes, but English government has never done that. This is very strange, because this is the result of ten years of policy of Blair and of the Labour government. The Labour government always pendled to the Islamists, and London have become for years the centre of Islamists. And why they did that? Were they afraid… Did England vote its security -- homeland security -- by allowing Islamist to [UNKNOWN time=29:35] asylum to Islamists, and because terrorism are everywhere in Europe, and, you know, you buy your security since 1973 -- since Europe has made this deal with the Palestinian terrorism, to recognize them, to receive them, to honor them. So Europe has lost the control of its own security. It relies for its security on the honor it give to the terrorist, and to ransom money. We are paying billions to Palestinians without even knowing what they are doing with this money.
PG: We know, they buying weapons and so on.
BY: Yes. So the tax payers are in fact paying to terrorist gang for its security. This is what we are doing in Europe. Like the dhimmi we are paying for our security. We live under the regime of dhimmitude without European knowing it, because the whole of the west is doing that. The whole of the west is paying security money, because we haven’t fought this war; the war against terrorism we haven’t fought.
“Without get rid of Israel…, it’s only Israel and that‘s finished“, we saw it, and from a small angle. We didn’t saw the enormous implication in morality, in political strategically angels but also culturally. Because our universities are submitted to the cultural jihad.
PG: Oh, our universities has been submitted to cultural jihad!
BY: Yes, because we adopt the Islamist view of history, which deny the history of the dhimmitude, the history of the dhimmis. This is why we don’t know it in the west. Before that -- this change in policy 1973 -- this history of Islamic expansion and Islamic treatment of the countries I has conquered, and the population it has conquered and submitted, they were known. It was told in universities.
PG: It was told in universities.
BY: Yes, this was 40 years ago, 50 years ago, this was absolutely… because it was texts on it, it was books on it. Muslim books.
Pam: This is what I found cautious and is always so upset about, because the books know are historically inaccurate.
BY: Yes, everything are inaccurate, because of the Islamization and Palestinization of the universities. Because it is in the universities that the Palestinian cult against Israel, against the west, against America developed. It is in fact the Palestinization of the universities that have totally obfuscated this reality, the history. And us in the west, we are the heir of the Greek and Roman civilization. We have to have our studies based on fact, on rationalism, and they should be separate from policies. They should not be submitted to policies. Now we are submitted to policy.
PG: I got it! Now I want to ask you something else. I want to ask you about George Bush? George Bush after 911 was right there! You know, the Bush doctrine I thought was gorgeous. I thought it was a gorgeous doctrine, and he stopped terrorists and the state sponsored terror. But there has been a change! There has been a change in his policy. This meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood he‘d like to have, I mean Condi is reaching now. This latest visit to these Saudi founded Islamic Center where hw appointed a special envoy to the OIC. What do you think happened to George Bush?
BY: Well, George Bush has been weakened internally.
PG: He has been weakened internally by the left?
BY: Yes, by the left, he cannot...and also by the evolution of the War in Iraq, and by the....by the situation in general in the world, and the nuclearization of Iran, which was not in the cards.
PG: OK. [Fatah] was fully armed with American munitions, they were armed to the teeth, FATAH. They didn't fight, they gave them, HAMAS , .....
BY: Yes, because I don't believe there is such a big difference in fact between FATAH and HAMAS.....
PG: and HAMAS.....
BY: .....there is a difference between the leadership because each one wants to control, to have the power.
BY: But with the idea (?) I don't think there is much difference because when FATAH, when FATAH had all the power with Arafat, Arafat was not the man of peace. He wanted peace, but without Israel.
PG: He never wanted peace. Without Israel, it would've been, "Next, next, next".
BY: No, without Israel! Peace without Israel. That means that Palestine would be from the Jordan to the Mediterranean....
BY: ...and Israel would have disappeared, and this is peace.
PG: Even then it wouldn't have been peace. They would have had another goal.
BY: Yes, of course, because there is no peace with jihad. I think that the way to defeat jihad, because jihad is not only military. It is a war, a military war, which is based on an ideology, so....like Communism, like Nazism, you have an ideology, a strategy. You have to, in order to defeat jihad, you have to know what is the ideology and this strategy in order to anticipate their movement also. But how us in the West can we defeat jihad, by learning what it means, what is the ideology behind it. So we don't consider that each action is separated from the previous act or the following act, but it is a chain of actions....
PG: And it's not presented that way in the media.
BY: ....which is always, which is always set in an ideological pattern. Once we see this pattern, we can react to reality, but otherwise if we continue to obliterate the reality, to deny the reality, we'll never have an impact on this reality. And I want to say that we can win this war with the Muslims. With the Muslims. Because it is for the Muslims to defeat the ideology of jihad, because us, we cannot. Us, we cannot change the interpretation of the Islamic text.
PG: But who can? You're not allowed!
BY: The Muslims have to do this.
PG: But they're not allowed, it's specifically written in the Qu'ran that you cannot alter a word, Bat .
BY: But they have many bright Muslims, many open-minded Muslims who are working on this problem.
PG: Oh yes?
BY: Yes, absolutely, and we have to encourage them because not only they will save the peace of the world, but they will save their own population, the Muslim population, and also the Muslim religion by bringing it to a new interpretation of the text, because Muslims are over a billion persons.
PG: A billion persons.
BY: Yes, spread all over the Earth. It is not like the German. You defeat a nation. And the Nazis was an ideology also, but it was like Islam, a religion. These have different perspective, different...um, how do you say in English?....different deepness. It is ???, it is theological, it relates to the mind, to the spirit, how the individual relates to his god, to his life, to his destiny, to the meaning of his life and destiny, it is a very important element. So the Muslims, the Muslim intelligentsia, must examine all those aspects in order to save what they can save of Islam for the modern time, for this century. (50:04) They have to make it more ???, more open to the people, a different modern theology which will, considered what has been...which will contextualize some text in the Qu'ran. For instance the cutting of the hand, the feet, so all the killing of the infidel,
PG: The clitorectomies,
BY: Yes, all those things. So they have to contextualize all ??? like Christians and Jews have done for their own religions. So, Muslims have to do it for their own religion, and I'm sure that they can do it, but it's only that they don't come together, they don't.....they're not well organized. They don't organize all of the possibilities, the ??? possibilities in the Muslim world. Because I know so many wonderful Muslims, like Noni Darwish (sp?)....
PG: Yeah, but Noni, yes, please, but listen....
BY: There are so many in Universities.....
PG: They're apostates!
BY: Yes, OK....
BY: ....They're not all apostates but they (the former Muslims, the Apostates) say there are good Muslims. So what do they mean by "good Muslims"? Being modern Muslim also. So they have to explain that also, they have to be leaders, they have to be the guides of their people of their religion. Listen, among the Muslims there's so much illiterate (illiteracy), there is so much misery, there is so much poverty, you cannot expect these people to think that these are all problems of theology, they have to have leaders.....
BY: Who will direct them?
PG: Yes, but the people who are going off and setting off these bombs are not living in poverty, Bat. You know, these suicide bombers and , you know, Mohamed Atta was living la vida loca here in America!
BY: Yes, there is unfortunately, there is this hate education, which is this hate against the West which starts with the hate against Israel. But the hate against Israel is the hate against the Christians. Because in the Qu'ran Jews and Christians are called the "people of the book". And it is in singular, it is one people. One "people of the book", so whatever you say.....and also, in the Qu'ran what is said against the Jews it is also against the Christians. It is just a question of intensity, but it is the same. And in the laws, also in the juridictions, the discrimination against the Jews is the same as the discrimination against the Christians. And in the, also, when you have a lawsuit, Jews and Christians can't testify one against or one for the other, which is not allowed with the Muslims. Jews and Christians cannot testify, not for nor against a Muslim because the Muslim is superior to Jews and Christians. But Jews and Christians, being the same, they can testify between them.
So the hate ????? (53:53) means also the hate against the West. And because Europe has allowed this, and not only has allowed that to go on, but has encouraged it, because of it's own anti-Semitism and hate against Israel, now it is faced with an even greater hate, against Europe and the West. We have to face this hate, we have to understand it, we have to fight it. But we have at the same time to encourage, and this is what I think Bush is doing with Pakistan and with Egypt because the governments of those countries which are friendly to the West and which have done nothing to stop this hate against the West, these governments are now in danger of collapsing and being replaced by the radicals. So what Bush is trying to do is to maintain at least this possible alliance because if all those countries become controlled by Al Qaeda and a caliphate, this is what they want to do, a caliphate will be dominant over all those countries. We shall really have to face a world jihad because it would be all the Muslim countries. First of all, a great immigration here, because not all the Muslims...a lot of Muslims will run away from those countries controlled by Al Qaeda. Second, we won't know what to do, because....how to face this immigration of millions and then we shall also have to face the problem of global terrorism, which exists already but which can become much worse.
So what Bush is trying to do, first of all for the Party, to keep the power for the Republican Party, because it is the strong party, because the Democratic Party will follow the European ...path, which will have been a disaster...
BY: Which has transformed Europe into Lebanon or Iraq and which will lead, unfortunately I am seeing, that we shall have very difficult years in Europe because many people are fed up with the policy which has been.....
PG: Oh, there's going to be a backlash, there's a backlash coming.
BY: Yes, there is a backlash. They want....the Parties also want to destroy the European Union because this policy is the result...has been done by the European Union without the knowledge of the people. So there is no clarity, no transparency, no democracy in the way the European Union conducts its policy. And this is consented (?) by many high level politicians, and also by lots of Europeans, but also by politicians who are asking for much more transparency.
PG: Listen, the Sarkozy election, that was a wonderful turn of events!
BY: Yes, yes, and we have also now to examine the entrance of Turkey in Europe, and...
PG: What are your thoughts on that?
BY: Well, I think it would be the end of Europe, the Europe we know. This certainly, because Turkey is going toward Islamisation. There is of course a class, an elitist class in Turkey which is very modern, very Europeanized, and very smart and brilliant. But this class existed also in Iran, in the time of the Shah, and then suddenly it disappeared!
BY: It was eliminated....
PG: It was crushed, it was crushed.
BY: Yes, it was crushed! People were killed, were thrown out...
PG: It was terrible!
BY: .....so, from one moment to another things can happen in this direction in Turkey although there is the army, who is very strong, and who is the guardian of democracy and secularism in Turkey but, we can ask ourselves, "For how long?".
PG: For how long.
BY: Anyway, for Bush....
PG: Yeah, what should he be doing?
BY: His position is to keep the...to prevent the Democratic Party to take over, because this would be the multi-lateral policy that has led Europe to its destruction. Then, to take care of..with its foreign policy to keep as much as possible its alliance, and maintain these powers who are friendly to the West and who are crumbling and to maintain them so that Al Qaeda doesn't take over. Egypt, Jordan, and other countries. So...because if this would come in it would be very difficult for Israel.
PG: Yeah, terrible. BY: It would be difficult for Israel, it would be difficult for the whole world because these events in the Arab countries would have repercussions on, in the West, in the Muslim communities which number millions and millions.
BY: There will be certainly more terrorism in Europe because terrorist cells would be activated. There will be a strong militantism in the countries which are under Al Qaeda control and in the communities which are in Europe, or in America, in the West. So the situation....we'll have to think also of the oil element, the oil factor. From one moment to another our whole economy, which is based on oil, can crumble. So there are political elements, economic elements, security elements, because we are becoming a "global" world, and so one event in one part of the world has repercussions everywhere.
PG: But it seems to me that there has to be a concerted effort to stamp out this extreme jihad, and I don't see that happening. I mean, this is a book, it's a French book, and if you would translate it for me Bat, what does it say?
BY: "The Fear of Islam".
PG: "The Fear of Islam", and I don't know if you're aware of it, but Bat was speaking in Toronto and, by the way, they did not want her to come. They were completely against her coming, as a matter of fact, if you don't mind, I'm going to get the little speech. Let me go under here, see if I can find it, this is how we work here, I do have it, OK. Hello! Yeah, they didn't want her.....she's an "Islamophobe", you know that name! Mark Steyn, Wafa Sultan, Brigitte Gabriel, who hasn't...Yours Truly....who hasn't suffered from that? But, "In the name of G-d, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful, The Canadian Islamic Congress Media Communique, they go on to say that they don't want her coming into Europe, they tried to stop...coming into Canada....they tried to stop her from speaking. This is the new, you know, this is the new fascism.
In America we have serious problems with that too. Actually, just this past week, it was voted down, the "Fairness Doctrine". Now the "Fairness Doctrine" was one thing. It was to stop talk radio. You know, in America that's the only place where people can really listen because the mainstream media is owned and is part and parcel with the left wing. I mean, it's the Democratic Party's organ for propaganda. You have Fox News, the problem with Fox is that it's the only one. They're not so Conservative, but everybody else is so incredibly lefty that Fox is, "EHH!", they want to kill it. So they wanted to make a "Fairness Doctrine", not for broadcast, just for radio. But what I'm trying to point out is that there are forces, evil forces at work here, and it's very frightening.
This whole pull-out of Iraq, you know that would be the worst thing. I mean, it would spin out of control, it would be mass slaughter. I don't know what good would come of it, it would become a haven for Al Qaeda.
BY: Yeah, it would be, so this is the problem also of Bush. People reproach him that he went into Iraq, but Iraq would anyway it could have turned that way, with Bush or without Bush, because once Saddam Hussein, because Saddam Hussein...is not eternal. So, he would have died, there would have been a revolt against him, Al Qaeda could have taken it, or Iran. So maybe in fact the intervention of the Allied Forces into Iraq, we see it now as something that has been very bad, and they badly conduct. Maybe there were, of course, there were mistakes.....
PG: What war ?
BY: Of course, that doesn't exist, you have to accept that when you go into a war, but in twenty years time we shall have another perspective on the Iraqi War. Me, I say that one thing that is very good in this....in what happens, in the consequence of the Iraq War is that Bush has declared a War on Terrorism. Before, us in Europe and also in the U.S., there were no terrorists. Terrorism didn't exist, although terrorism was there. We were paying terrorists to save us......yes, ransom, security....
PG: Like the jiyza Isn't that what it is? You're paying off for protection?
BY: Yes, yes, so they don't attack you. So this is what we were living, and this war in Iraq finally showed the weakness of The West, showed that there was a ??? global jihad, everyone saw it, everyone got afraid, we spoke about, we put....because otherwise, the tradition of the terrorist cells in Europe would have continued. Indefinitely. Until everything blew up. So this has....Bush('s) war in Iraq and his rhetoric, and also Blair because he converted later to the..to this Blair Doctrine, so he suddenly realized it. So they put on the ??? this problem which was totally overlooked deliberately by the leaders of the world. And it provoked a reaction, a reaction of security; we protect ourselves against this terrible situation. Also, it woke up Muslims, who suddenly became our friends in Europe, and because there are many Muslims who are totally on our side, who have very well integrated into our democracy and with our secular values....
PG: And they're afraid to speak up?
BY: Some are afraid, others take enormous risks to do it. So we realize that we are in a war of ideas because also like the.....for instance Theo van Gogh in Holland, also what happened in France, also in Denmark, people are aggress(ive) because of their ideas and in Europe there is a fight to impose the freedom of speech, which is written, and freedom of opinion, which is written in our European Constitution. It is a right that we have to safeguard [...]
BY: ....to safeguard. So there is all those elements of which we are speaking and which were totally in existence before the war in Iraq. But also in Iraq what it shows: the forces of the Coalition went there, the American forces and other forces went there, soldiers were sacrificed, they were killed, they were maimed. PG: Maimed. BY: The people, American and other people, and other countries of the Coalition, they paid billions. For what? To give security and democracy to a people they didn't know, to the Iraqi people, to Arab, Muslim people. This is true, this is the true message. PG: Yeah. BY: Now that being said, they kill each other, they destroy each other with hate. PG: They're brutal. BY: They behave like barbarians. This is evidence to everyone, but it doesn't change the fact that the West went there to save them, to....because they could have established together other federations, other people. They could have established a democracy, a democratic regime, live in peace, and with lots of money and facilities because the country is rich. It's a rich country.
PG: Yeah, it's a rich country.
BY: It has a lot of possibilities...
PG: But we're trying to teach them, I mean, they're oil rich countries, and they're living nomadic lives!
BY: Yes! And so this is up to them, but the effort has been done, the
generosity of the West has been proven and this cannot be eliminated
from the history, it is there. And I think that this is clear to many
people. To many Arabs and to many, um, to many Muslim people, they recognize that because I see sometimes what they (hide?), and they recognize that. And we have to stop victimizing them and to responsibilize them, to say, "You are responsible for all of these terrible things that are happening to you, especially in Iraq. You are responsible! You have created this hell and you have to get out of this hell, and it's up to you to get out of this hell!"
PG: But you know what?
BY: "You have to do it"!
PG: Listen, yesterday there was a piece in the Washington Post, page 37. Buried. About how Iraqis were joining U.S. Soldiers in the fight. Now this is extraordinary news, it's great news, and you'll never see it in the media. The media only wants, "3,528 Dead". You see, that's also a different problem. People are only seeing one angle of the prism in this really incredibly complex war on the jihad, of which Iraq is a central front!
BY: Yes, but because the media, and this is what is so terrible, the Western media is allied with the terrorist force. It is leading....
PG: The Western media is allied with the terrorist force?
BY: Yes, yes.
PG: Have I not been saying that for years?
(music begins, PG says, "That's my phone.")
BY: Yes, because themselves, they are afraid. They are afraid of their own terrorism, they are afraid of, like, what happened to Alan Johnson, that journalist with....
PG: But Alan Johnson was such a sympathizer! He was such a Pali sympathizer!
BY: And now you see it with, uh, this uh....
PG: Leave it (the phone), she's (Bat Ye'or) more important. No, I'm just saying, you see, he was in their camp, and look, they kidnapped him!
BY: Yes, this is it. Because it is not good to say with terrorists, "We love you, we'll help you". It won't help! They have their own agenda, they're using you. They're using you.
PG: Yes, of course.
BY: So then anyway, I think that the media is responsible for our defeat, if there is a defeat, it is too early to speak of a defeat....
PG: Right. Which is why people who do what I do work so hard. Because we're trying to, I mean we're smaller, and so it's viral, like this will go off and then it gets sent, and then....so you don't get that, like, immediate CNN hits of a million, it'll take two months.
BY: Yes....No, the BBC is the enemy of peace, the BBC, because it is...it is so partial in the news it gives and its vision, and it is all linked with a former alliance of the Left with the Arab-Muslim world, with the Palestinians, with the Communists, so they haven't yet changed that. They don't understand that we are in a new age. We are in the Age of Global Jihad. And it is finished, Communism, it is finished now, and we have to face this new challenge!
PG: Every rally that I go to, every anti-America rally, every anti-Israel rally, I have to tell you who was there: the Islamis are there, the Commies are there, the Socialists are there, and the Democrats are there. There is a Leftist-Islamic Alliance now, Bat.
BY: Yes, of course, there is, and we see this particularly in Europe.So these are working because also there are a lot of petro-dollars going around.
BY: A lot of corruption, money, which is floating (around), and therefor either in Universities or to organizations, so-called humanitarian organizations who are very vocal.
PG: OK, but speaking of the petro-dollars, do you think that Iran, that it's a fait d'accompli, because you have courageous people like John Bolton coming out and saying that, you know, right now you've completely used up any time in terms of the E.U.: four years. Four years! And in that four years, what'd they do? They marched nuclear proliferation. They marched nuclear enrichment. Is it a done deal? And once Iran does go nuclear, you just know that they're going to distribute that technology to the 'Iranian Foreign Legion': HAMAS, Hezbollah, Fatah al Islam(???) in Lebanon, everywhere. The world changes in a day. The world is flat. It's not like anything before, ever, in the history of man.
So what do we, what do we do? I mean, me, I say we should have gone there yesterday and taken out the nuclear installations. Not killed people, I mean, yes, "Oh no, someone's going to get killed!". Listen, those weapons are as much a weapon against their own people, to keep them in line, as it is to boss around the region and create the "Shi'a Crescent".
BY: Yes. I think that was....that many factors and components that are paralyzing America and the West. First of all, the division of the West, Europe against America, and...which is weakening us. And this was a very bad policy...um...which has been done, and...by Europe, and it is weakening Europe more than America. And then, there is also the fact that America wants also to win the heart and soul of Islam. I think...
PG: Because America's so delicious, you know, yeah.
BY: I think this policy is stupid.
BY: Because you will never win the soul and heart of your enemy unless you agree to what they ask from you, what they want from you.
PG: And you're assuming that Islam has a heart and a soul. I don't see that. Their perspective is not a Liberal perspective, it's not a secular perspective, or a Judeo-Christian perspective, it's not.
BY: No, of course, but they want, by doing that they want to Islamize America.
BY: America will win the heart and soul of Islam when it will accept to be Islamized. No way out. So it shouldn't, America should not do that, it should in the contrary remain what it is, fight for it's values -- Judeo-Christian values, policy(?) secular...secular political institutions and so on -- and democracy, of course, equality of rights, and it should bring lots of Muslims towards those values.
BY: Rather than Islamize itself...
PG: That would be the worst thing.
BY: ...and go into a way, a policy of justifying, culpabilizing oneself and justifying the aim of those who want to destroy it. You know, because this is what Europe has done in order to come closer to the terrorists and to the Arab masses, to the Arab masses! I think that this is crazy. This is suicidal. I think America stay firm on its principles and many Muslim people and population will come over to America because whatever is said of the propaganda, still the Muslim population are not stupid. And they, basically, they have the same --they are not monsters, also -- they have the same aspirations as us. And they want to live in a, they are afraid of it, a....a nuclear war, which will...
PG: Wipe them out.
BY: It will wipe them out also. Who wants that? These are the foolish terrorists; but we have to find a modest defense where we accept each other and we have to find ways to do that. It is not easy, but they exist.
PG: OK. I'm a little skeptical, but I'm going to go with you because you're much brighter than I am. One last question I need to talk to you about. Olmert.
BY: Yeah, it is a disastrous government.
PG: A nightmare!
BY: Yes, it is a nightmare, it is a....there was the corruption, there is the scandal, there is the failure, the incompetency, but what do you want? The Israeli people, they have elected this government, and I repeat what the bright, intellectual....intellectual Israelis have said, it is this government, it reflects the Israeli people. Unfortunately, the Israelis of today are not the Israelis who built up the country. They are not the same, it is not the same generation, it is not...there are so many, in Israel, so many anti-Israelis....
BY: So much self-hatred, so much nepotism, so much....
PG: I call them "Jewicidals".
BY: Yes, so much love of materialism, so it is not hte same idealist people who built up the country. They are not worthy of their ancestors.
PG: No, they're not worthy of their ancestors.
BY: No. They have elected what they are, their own image. They have to change, if they have to change, to go back to their roots, to the signification of Israel in the history of the world because Israel is a very small country! There is nothing but a tremendous signification on a spiritual basis, because it represented Israel...represented....it was formed by the liberation of a people from slavery. Now you have several slaveries. You have the enslavement and the Pharaoh, you have the enslavement of the dhimmitude.....
PG: Pharaoh, Dhimmitude,
BY: Yes, the enslavement of mind. And Israel and the enslavement......and the enslavement of the Concentration Camps. And of...um....and of the humiliation also of the human being, so you have lots of types of humiliation, of enslavement, and Israel fought against all those types of enslavement. And Israel was formed for liberty, represents the liberty, the freedom from this enslavement. From the Pharaohnic enslavement, from the intellectual enslavement, of dhimmitude and physical imprisonment of the dhimmitude, and now Israel represents a democratic people with whatever human failure that is in any society, human society. But what it protects it is the fighting against the enslavement of jihad. This is what Israel represents, this is what it fights, and this fight is the fight of the West, is the fight of every free society, is also the fight of Muslims who are behind Israel. And this is what I want to say also, because we cannot always project a homogenic...eh, a homogenous image of the Muslim world, because this is not true. And we have to recognize the good elements, the human elements, because they are human like us, on (??) the planet in the Muslim world, and we have to work and to link with them.
And there are also, for instance, I haven't met him but I spoke with a Muslim in home, Magdi Allen (SP??), who is a Muslim from Egypt who lives now in home, he has an important function, I think he is a the is the Director, (or) Editor of the Journal della Sera (Corriere della Sera), which is an important Roman Journal, and he wrote a book, Viva Israel!. He's all for Israel. For him Israel is a great thing. And I think that this Muslim man had the courage, he lives under guard....um, bodyguard, he had the courage to fight for his idea, for his ideal. And for us also, because whoever fights for democracy and for peace is with us. So I think this is why I want the people to understand that we have to link with these absolutely fantastic Muslim people, because it is with them that we shall win the war against Jihad and the war for freedom. For freedom for the Muslims too, to liberate them from the ideology of Jihad, and this is very important. And this is because when we liberate ourself from the state(?) of Jihad, we liberate also the Muslims from this ideology. We are all linked together, we are all alike, because we are one humanity! We are the same.
PG: Yes. Thank you.
BY: Thank you for inviting me.
PG: Thank you so much for everything you do. You're an inspiration for so many people.
BY: Thank you, thank you very much.