9-11 reasons to call Muslims "terrorists"
By Reuven Koret, Israel Insider  October 22, 2003

Great news! Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said Tuesday that he would be willing to come to Israel under certain conditions. "I would [visit] after the Jewish leadership would go the Muslim countries and explain why they call Muslims 'terrorists,'" he said. "That would be fair. Then I will go to Tel Aviv and explain why I said what I said."

Well, Your Excellency, I may not be a Jewish leader, and we may not be allowed to set foot in any Muslim country, but I would love to take you up on your challenge, though I must admit to being taken aback by the simplicity of your question.

I would have expected a more difficult challenge. I thought perhaps you would request that we Israelis would learn to stand patiently in a line, or perhaps start driving defensively. Indeed, the ease of the answer to your question proves to me that you must be just dying to visit us in Tel Aviv.

And why not, Mahathir? If, as you claim, we Jews rule the world, why not be close to the center of global power, the hub of world domination? If, as you apparently believe, we get the whole world to fight our wars by proxy, hey, why not come on down and learn from the masters of persuasion?

So, just to make sure you get the chance to hop on an El Al jet and visit the Holy Land, you ask us a powderpuff question that even the simple son could answer on Passover. Very clever, Your Excellency! You're catching on already.

I am tempted to say that a harder question would be finding reasons not to call Muslims "terrorists." To be clear, I am in no way implying that all Muslims are terrorists. But to imply, as you seem to be doing, that it is somehow difficult to find reasons to call Muslims "terrorists," or, for that matter, to find Muslim terrorists, well, sir, you are certainly assuring your prompt arrival on the shores of the Zionist entity.

Still, I would hate to miss the opportunity to host you in the Jewish Homeland, so I will bite at your bait as if it were lox on a line, herring on a hook.

I know you believe that increasingly, Jews are foolish enough to believe the various peace plans being offered by the Arabs, just as the Jews in the time of the original Mohammed back in the 8th century bought the phony and temporary pact he offered at Hudaibiyah. It is a precedent you cited as proof that we Jews can be lured into mistakes, believing in the various false promises your co-religionists repeatedly offer us.

In the guise of explaining why Jews supposedly rule the world, you (like Yasser Arafat before you) actually reveal, with your Koranic allusions to Hudaibiyah, the Muslim strategy for doing so: making temporary tactical "peace" agreements with Israel and the West that you will not hesitate to break when it is to your advantage. Peace with the infidel for you is just a weapon to be wielded so the enemy is lulled into false security. For this candid admission, we should be grateful. Are you sure you're not working for the Mossad?

But let's get back to your challenge that we explain why we call Muslims "terrorists"? It reminds me of a Shakespearean sonnet. How do I call thee, Mahathir? Let me count the ways.

I realize you wouldn't consider it objective if we Jews were to define terrorism, so let's make do with the U.S. State Department definition. Yes, yes, I know that for you, the people over at State are just Zionist tools, proxies for their warmonger overlords in Jerusalem.

But hey, for whatever reason: somebody over there in Foggy Bottom seems to have a foggy idea about what constitutes a terrorist attack:

"(1) The hijacking or sabotage of any conveyance (including an aircraft, vessel, or vehicle).

"(2) The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to detain, another individual in order compel a third person (including a governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or detained.

(3) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person or upon the liberty of such a person.

(4) An assassination.

(5) The use on any biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device, or

(6) explosive or firearm (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.

(7) A threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.

Gosh, do you really need any examples of Muslim involvement in each and every one of the foregoing, anywhere (everywhere) in the world? Do you have a few days to remember? Suffice it to raise just a few brief reminders, none of which occurred in Israel: Entebbe, Achille Lauro, Munich, Daniel Pearl, World Trade Center. And there are a few thousand more where those came from. In the last few years.

But actually, Mr. Prime Minister, I recognize you weren't asking for a definition of terrorism but of "terrorist." The State Department has something to say about that as well:

"One who knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support to any individual, organization, or government in conducting a terrorist activity at any time, including any of the following acts: "(1) The preparation or planning of a terrorist activity."(2) the gathering of information on potential targets for terrorist activity."(3) The providing of any type of material support, including a safe house, transportation, communication, funds, false identification, weapons, explosives, or training, to any individual the actor knows or has reason to believe has committed or plans to commit a terrorist activity. "(4) The soliciting of funds or other things of value for terrorist activity of for any terrorist organization. "(5) The solicitation of any individual for membership in a terrorist organization, terrorist government, or to engage in a terrorist activity."

So how many is that? 10? 12? 9? 11? Well, I guess I've lost count of reasons why one might call Muslims "terrorists." But you may be thinking: "I don't care what you call me, just call me"? Well, Mr. Prime Minister, we Jews are calling you!

So, Your Excellency, without further ado: start packing!

We've prepared a VIP itinerary just for you. I look forward to showing you where the Elders of Zion meet (on a daily basis, as they are choosing lottery numbers) to plot world domination. We can go to the beach, where the Israeli girls are plotting in their bikinis how to seduce Arab leaders. We can visit the blood matzah factory and you can sample the wares. We can eat the chickpeas so you can see and smell how we prepare poison gas.

You said it yourself: "It cannot be that there is no other way; 1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews." Ah, but it can be. Indeed, sir, we are showing you how: just ask, and we will try to answer. Learn from the People of the Book and next time you'll ask us a harder question. Maybe next time we'll need to look it up.

But I must say, yes, Mr. Prime Minister! I agree with you when you said: "For well over half a century we have fought over Palestine. What have we achieved? Nothing. We are worse off than before." That is wise. If only those who support the armed struggle would learn!

Indeed, you are so wise in matters of statecraft that it occurs to me that there must be at least one additional reason for the dumb question you want us to answer in order to invite you to our country, and exercise your "right of return" with far more right than Palestinian Muslims, whether terrorists or not.

Mahathir Mohamad, you don't need to explain to me why you said what you said. Since you clearly have a yiddische kopf, the reason is pretty obvious: you must be Jewish!

You may want to save some of your next questions for Mom.

But, in the meantime, please repeat after me: "L'shana haba b'yerushalayim. Next year in Jerusalem!"

Your Excellency, I hope you enjoy falafel with your gefilte fish