Pamela Geller Really, Really Hates Islam, Obama, and the UN

Bat Ye’or and Pamela Galler share that Muslim-baiting vibe

I started out with this: I wanted to see how many negatives Muslim-baiter Pamela Geller could work into an article on World Net Daily. Okay, I admit it! It was a slow Sunday night!

Even when compared to 2012’s other conservative ranters and spewers, a sour-faced lot if there ever was one, Muslim-baiter (is it only a happy coincidence that if you say Muslim-baiter over and over again it sounds like “masturbator”?) Pamela Geller stands out.

For example, she refers to the United Nations General Assembly as “That collective negation of humanity” (humanity being, for Geller, that happy condition which applies when everybody hates Islam).

And in a surprisingly mild rebuke, she refers to “four years of Obama’s thinly veiled hostility toward Israel.”

Wow, Palmela Geller, meek and mild! (don’t worry, she goes for the nut-shot later, when she’s really got her Muslim-baiting lather up).

She isn’t happy with 2012 (what conservative is?); she likes 1922 much better, not because as years go, it rolls off the tongue, but because the feckless League of Nations “voted unanimously in 1922 in favor of the idea that “recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

Great. Yippee.

What she fails to note is that the League of Nations did not establish a Jewish state in Palestine. It did establish a British mandate in Palestine, rather than that of one of the other front-runners, the French and the Papacy.

Nor does Geller mention the preamble to the 1922 Mandate for Palestine:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The “civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” are not congenial to her argument, after all.

I will also leave out the historical issues with the name Palestine. I won’t mention at all that Palestine is the Greek and Roman name for the region and that the name derives not from any Jewish state in the Bible (Judah or Israel) but from the very Gentile and un-Jewish Peleset, a tribe numbered among the so-called “Sea Peoples” who invaded Egypt at the end of the Bronze Age. You might also know these folks as the Peleshet, or, more commonly, the Philistines.

You know, the arch-enemies of the Jews in the Old Testaments (well, okay, along with those pesky Super-Gentiles, the Canaanites).

Yeah…Palestine is NOT named for the Jewish people. You can relate a lot more to the name of Palestine than simply Jews. There were other people too – other ethnicities, other religions. Jewish civilization did not extend to the Mediterranean in ancient times. That is a fairly modern development. The coast was the domain of Pagans – Philistines, Phoenicians, Greeks.

As I’ve noted here before, Gaza was a very strong Pagan city. One of the last holdouts, in fact, against the brutal tyranny of encroaching Christianity in Late Antiquity. You can say, quite factually, that there is nothing Jewish about Gaza.

Or, you could put it more colloquially, and say that Israel never lost anything in Gaza.

In other words, not everybody in the region became Jewish. There were many Pagans from long before any Jewish state. Some later became Christians at the point of a sword. Some later became Muslims to avoid paying the tax on non-Muslims. Pagans quickly learned that Islam killed you as dead as Christianity, but with far greater efficiency. But not everybody became Muslim ether; their remained Jews and Christians and even a few Pagans.

I won’t mention any of that.

I also won’t mention that it was the much-maligned United Nations that actually established the state of Israel after World War II. Not the League of Nations, which was about as effective as the Articles of Confederation.

The idea with the UN, after all, was to have an organization that could actually effect change on a global scale and to mitigate against another World War. Geller likes that the UN established Israel. She isn’t so happy they also want to establish a state for those “Others” who aren’t Jewish: Palestine.

She is so disappointed by the changes in the UN since 1945 that she says of 2012, “The modern era of the savage, that’s where civilization is in 2012.”

Boy, I think Pamela needs to pick up a history book. Or a dictionary. “Savage” is not a synonym for “something you don’t like.”

Geller quotes the ever-quotable fellow Muslim-baiter John Bolton, who hates the UN every bit as much as Geller, as saying that the whole mess in the Land of the Philistines is “an ongoing failure in the Obama administration to take this issue seriously.”

Geller says that instead of working with the United States, the United Nations has the audacity to work with the OIC (The Organization of Islamic Cooperation), which she defines as “56 Muslim countries plus the Muslim-occupied areas of Israel that are known as the “Palestinian” territories” but which the OIC defines as “the collective voice of the Muslim world and ensuring to safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony among various people of the world.”

We all like to appeal to people smarter or better informed than us, or to specialists in their fields, to shore up our arguments. But Geller falls into a typical Republican trap here, calling to her side “The world-renowned scholar Bat Ye’or.”

If you go to Wikipedia you will see Bat Ye’or described as, “an Egyptian-born British Jewish writer, political commentator and conspiracy theorist who writes about the history of Middle Eastern Christian and Jewish dhimmis living under Islamic governments.”

Because conspiracy theorists are specialists in their fields. The problem is, conspiracy theories are….how shall I put this without being indelicate?…Conspiracy theories.

If anybody hates Islam more than Pamela Geller, it is perhaps conspiracy theorist Bat Ye’or, who is known for having made popular a term, dhimmitude, which even a noted Jewish scholar has called Islamophobic. And “Eurabia” an idea which actual scholars dismiss as hooey,

And if long citations from a noted conspiracy theorist form the backbone of Pamela Geller’s article, than Pamela Geller’s article must, itself, be considered an example of conspiracy theory.

Let’s face it: Geller doesn’t cite any actual world-renowned scholar; conspiracy theories are more congenial to the doyen of Atlas Shrugs;  or advance anything resembling a cogent argument, as would be expected in any institute of higher learning.

Instead, Geller presses Bat Ye’or’s conspiracy theories. Bat Ye’or, who has found her proper home on the pages of rather than  between the covers of peer-reviewed scholarly journals.

Bat Ye’or adds: “The caliphate is alive and growing within Europe. … It has advanced through the denial of dangers and the obfuscating of history. It has moved forward on gilded carpets in the corridors of dialogue, the network of the Alliances and partnerships, in the corruption of its leaders, intellectuals and NGOs, particularly at the United Nations.”

So what we have here is Pamela Geller, who thinks Islam is a “perennially barbaric, parasitic and oppressive religion” calling  on the support of the Muslim-baiter who actually said those words, in order to prove that Islam is a “perennially barbaric, parasitic and oppressive religion”

I won’t mention any comparison with the Nazis, who thought the Jews were parasitic. I won’t mention that at all. Even some progressives bridle at apt historical comparisons, assuming somehow that unwholesome facts cheapen an argument.

Oh, but I promised you a nut-shot, and I shall deliver. Geller says,

Israel must be allowed to defend itself. If Barack Obama forces another ill-advised Muslim Brotherhood-devised truce upon the Israelis, the consequences could be disastrous not just for Israel, but for the free world in general.

The poison fruit of Obama’s anti-freedom foreign policy failures just keeps getting more rancid.

So to recap: 2012 sucks, the UN General Assembly is a collective negation of humanity…the world caliphate looms… and Obama’s foreign policy is rancid.

And Obama made Israel’s Iron Dome possible. But Pamela Geller won’t mention that. She won’t mention that at all.

And why would she? It’s not a conspiracy theory.

Hrafnkell Haraldsson, a social liberal with leanings toward centrist politics has degrees in history and philosophy. His interests include, besides history and philosophy, human rights issues, freedom of choice, religion, and the precarious dichotomy of freedom of speech and intolerance. He brings a slightly different perspective to his writing, being that he is neither a follower of an Abrahamic faith nor an atheist but a polytheist, a modern-day Heathen who follows the customs and traditions of his Norse ancestors. He maintains his own blog, A Heathen's Day, which deals with Heathen and Pagan matters, and Mos Maiorum Foundation, dedicated to ethnic religion. He has also contributed to NewsJunkiePost, GodsOwnParty and Pagan+Politics.

Copyright PoliticusUSA LLC 2008-2023