Sunday, February 28, 2010

Haveil Havalim

Edition #258 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is up at The Israel Situation.

Goldstone Aide to Attend Pro-Palestinian Event

Quite frankly why would UN Watch want to bother preventing Marotta from speaking at this anti-Israel event? Such activities only further discredit the Goldstone Report and expose it's true purpose, which was a campaign to slander and blood libel Israel.

NGO to Ban Ki-Moon: Bar UN Goldstone Aide From Palestinian Lobby Event


UN Watch Calls on UN Chief to Stop Francesca Marotta, Head UN Staffer of Goldstone Report, From Speaking at "Russell Tribunal on Palestine"







Geneva, Feb. 26, 2010 — UN Watch, the Geneva-based watchdog organization, today called on UN chief Ban Ki-Moon to stop Francesca Marotta, the head of the UN staff that compiled the Goldstone Report, from participating at a political lobbying event in Lausanne, Switzerland, in support of the "Russell Tribunal on Palestine." The full letter follows below.

_________________________________



His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary-General
The United Nations
New York, NY 10017
February 26, 2010
Dear Mr. Secretary-General,
We are deeply concerned that the Head of the Secretariat of the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict—the staff that drafted the Goldstone Report—is scheduled to participate tomorrow in a pro-Palestinian, political and lobbying event.
Ms. Francesca Marotta is listed as the first speaker at an event to support the “Russell Tribunal on Palestine,” advertised by Collectif Urgence Palestine, to be held in Lausanne, Switzerland, tomorrow, 27 February, at 2:30 pm. (See listing at http://www.urgencepalestine.ch/Agenda/agenda10.html#TRP270210.)
The advertisement reads (translated from French original):
“On the eve of the first session of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine to be held in Barcelona from 1 to March 3, 2010, the Swiss National Committee of Support to the Russell Tribunal on Palestine Calls to support this international citizen initiative with Francesca Marotta, the Secretariat of the Fact-Finding Mission that established the Goldstone Report, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights…” It goes on to list two other speakers.

As you may know, the “Russell Tribunal on Palestine” is a highly partisan and political exercise designed to use the rhetoric of law to lobby against Israel and for a one-sided Palestinian narrative. Its “verdict” is a foregone conclusion.

We further note that the Swiss organizer of this Lausanne event featuring Ms. Marotta, Collectif Urgence Palestine, organized a demonstration last year on 2 March 2009 in Geneva. (See http://solidarites.blog.tdg.ch/archive/2009/03/01/rassemblement-contre-le-gala-pour-l-armee-israelienne-%E2%80%A2-lund.html.) The demonstration’s stone throwing and verbal threats against Jewish community members was condemned as an apparently anti-Semitic incident by the UN Human Rights Committee, in its October 2009 report on Switzerland. (See http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2009/10/30/un-slams-switzerland-for-failing-to-investigate-pattern-of-anti-semitic-incidents/.)

Article 100 of the UN Charter requires that the UN Secretariat avoid partisan and political entanglements that compromise the principles of neutrality, objectivity and professionalism.

Especially on a day when the UN General Assembly is voting again on the Goldstone Report, we urge you to uphold these principles, and the integrity of your staff, by immediately instructing Ms. Marotta to avoid participating in, or otherwise lending support and legitimacy to, this partisan and political event.

Please know that in all your efforts to assure the adherence of the United Nation to its noble principles, you will have the full support of UN Watch.

Sincerely,
Hillel C. Neuer
Executive Director
UN Watch
Geneva, Switzerland

Campuses Hosting Annual Jew-hatred Fest

How pathetic are these gay activists who come out in support of those who believe they should be executed for their lifestyle? It’s amazing the extent of Jew-hatred which some harbor that it trumps their own sense of self-preservation. Get ready for the hideous spectacle of "Israel Apartheid Week", the annual Jew-hating fest coming to college campuses around the world in March where muslims and leftists get together to call for the obliteration of Israel and the genocide of its Jewish population. Phyllis Chesler rightly suggests why not have islamic apartheid month. After all it is the islamic countries which actually do practice religious and gender apartheid. Meanwhile Israel is the only country in the region which is not an apartheid state.

Islamic Apartheid Month


Coming to a City Near You

Guess who’s coming to California State University at Sacramento? None other than CAIR — only this time they’re pairing Japanese American students with Muslim American students for a three hour workshop: “Voices Unite in Solidarity; Japanese American Students and Muslim American Experiences Post-9/11.”

Makes sense, given all the recent and multiple Japanese-American underwear, shoe, and body-cavity bombers. Gotta stop those Japanese jihadists.

On March 2, 2010 (smack-dab in the middle of the by-now infamous Israeli Apartheid week), California students will be helped to understand that the racist views that led to the 20th century internment of Japanese American citizens during Word War II is, come to think of it, happening all over again. But this time it’s happening to Muslim American students who are being persecuted and treated as badly as Israel allegedly mistreats the Palestinians and as America once treated the native Indians, the African slaves, immigrants, the impoverished — the way Americans and Israelis have always treated all the innocent, noble underdogs.

God bless the internet. God bless Pajamas Media. Why? Because of our most excellent readers. A reader, one Ibn Rawandi, wrote to me about this very workshop in Sacramento. With his permission, allow me to share his letter with you:
Read the whole thing

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Arab Rocket Factory in Jerusalem

Screw those who demand Israel surrender sovereignty of eastern Jerusalem to the "palestinians" who in the first place have no right to it along with the fact that it will be used as a launching pad for rockets at ever closer range to Jewish population centers. Israel must make it clear that under no circumstances will Jerusalem ever be divided again. It will always remain the united capital of the Jewish state.

Israel raided 'Arab rocket factory' in own capital
Move indicates dangerous escalation of Palestinian terrorism
Posted: February 25, 2010
10:21 am Eastern

By Aaron Klein

WorldNetDaily
JERUSALEM – Israeli border police earlier this month secretly raided an Arab neighborhood in Jerusalem to search for a suspected Qassam rocket factory, according to a senior Palestinian security official with knowledge of the incident.

Officially, Israel told media the raid, which took place in the Shoafat neighborhood on Feb. 8, was to arrest tax evaders and enforce municipal laws.

But the security official told WND that border police also searched Shoafat's metal and steel workshops and factories for a suspected Qassam manufacturing site.

Upon further questioning today, Moshe Finsi, spokesman for the border police here, told WND part of the Shoafat raid indeed focused on anti-terror activities and not just municipal matters.

"Yes, part focused on anti-terror action to prevent organized terror, search for bombs, drugs, weapons," he said.

Finsi denied the raid searched for any Qassam factory.

Shoafat is located in the northeast section of Jerusalem. The village is entirely inhabited by Arabs and Palestinians, although many of the Arab homes there are built illegally on Jewish-owned property. Although Shoafat is technically in Jerusalem, Arab roads there lead directly into the West Bank.

On Wednesday, Israel announced to the public that the Palestinian Authority two weeks ago – just before Israel's raid on Shoafat – arrested five members of Hamas and discovered a Qassam rocket in Beit Likya, a village about four miles from Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport.

If a rocket factory production site was found inside a Jerusalem neighborhood, it would be a major escalation of the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure.
Continue reading

Friday, February 26, 2010

First muslim College in America

This is just what America needs, another venue for indoctrinating and churning out jihadis for generations to come. America's first muslim college is set to open in California. I could imagine what courses will be available. Perhaps suicide bombing 101. We are insane and will not face up to the reality that islam is at war with us, that islam is a totalitarian political ideology more than it it is a personal faith. While our soldiers are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are inviting the jihadis inside our country. Why are we bothering to fight wars abroad if only to surrender our country to the enemy from within? This is the beginning of the end. We are headed towards the same situation as Europe. H/T Loganswarning

America’s first Muslim college

WASHINGTON – As interested students race to beat the fast approaching enrolment deadline, Muslims are turning their sights to the Zaytuna College in California to see if America’s first ever Muslim college will live up to the high expectations.

“We’ve been waiting for this time,” Imam Zaid Shakir, a scholar-in-residence and lecturer at Zaytuna Institute and a co-founded of the college, told IslamOnline.net in an exclusive interview.

“It’s been a long road to get here, Alhamdulillah, and to know that we’re in this final part to getting freshman class set is very exciting.”

Zaytuna College, a brainchild of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf, Imam Shakir and Professor Hatem Bazian, will stop accepting applications for its first freshman class of 2010 on March 1.

With the application process coming to a close, a committee is readying to study the applications and admit between 20-25 students as incoming freshmen.

And although the college is seeking Muslim students, it is not exclusive to Muslims.

There will be no gender separation at the college and academic pursuits and freedom will be paramount.

Course subjects have been decided on, but educators are now writing syllabi and mapping out teaching methodology for the subjects.

Currently only two majors are being offered: Arabic language and Islamic law and theology.

As the class size increases and more educators are hired, other majors will be offered, Imam Shakir said.

Zaytuna College is in the rigorous process of seeking accreditation from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, a process that will take a number of years and one that Imam Shakir hopes will be completed by the time the freshman class graduates.

He noted that they have been able to achieve the goal of raising nearly $4 million needed for its temporary location at Berkeley.

Now they face the challenge of raising upwards of $65 million for an endowment fund that will ensure a consistent monetary support and alleviate the need for constant fundraising.

Along with that comes a move in the near future to a permanent location in Northern California.

Where America meets Islam

Imam Shakir, along with other Zaytuna College advisors, criss-crossed the country to drum up support, raise funds and answer questions from perspective students and their parents.

He also held a series of weekly informational online seminars explaining the unique nature of the college, which aims to meld two types of learning institution: a college focusing on religious study and one where such study will be explored in the context of a liberal arts education.

“It’s the first time something like this is being attempted in this country,” said Bazian, a professor at the University of California-Berkeley and at St. Mary’s College of California.

“Years ago when we discussed the need for an accredited Muslim college in the US, we knew that we needed one where students learn about the Islamic faith but also how Islam works into the American fabric and into various liberal arts subjects—sociology, anthropology, history, philosophy.”

For example, says Imam Shakir, in a philosophy class students will study Descartes but also spend a lot of time on Al-Ghazali.

“We want to teach the fundamentals of Islam—Shariah, history, Arabic, Qur’an—but we want to bring it into the context of an American education, how these branches of Islam work in the context of other educational subjects.”

One of the goals of the college is to produce scholars of Islam who are a product of an American education system.

One of the main obstacles to the rise of Islam in the US has been that the majority of educators and mosque leaders are educated overseas.

“The wonderful scholars we have in the US get their Islamic foundation from universities in Egypt, Turkey, and other countries,” notes Bazian.

“But we have not been able to produce scholars who received their education here in the US and who can truly understand and address the questions and concerns of the Muslim-American population.”

Bazian asserts that Zaytuna College graduate could become imams at mosques and directors of Islamic community centers.

Imam Shakir explains that another important goal of the college is to provide a sound liberal arts education grounded by Islamic studies that can then be a jumping-off point to any advanced degrees in law, business, medicine and other subjects.

Omar A. Ansari says if he were 18 again, he would apply to Zaytuna College.

“I think a B.A. from Zaytuna would be a great foundation upon which to build further, even if one intends to do law, medicine, etc,” he told IOL.

“I am looking forward to the day when the college allows its classes to be audited, inshallah.”

Mona El-Bashir, a high school student in Virginia, she has been following the development of the Zaytuna College and is excited to see it opening in 2010.

“I am thinking about applying for 2011,” she told IOL.

“I will have to convince my parents that it is a worthy enough education for me to travel all the way to the West Coast.”

Thursday, February 25, 2010

PCUSA is at it Again

This is absolutely revolting. The Presbyterian Church of the United States is targeting Israel again. Where is the Presbyterian church when it comes to the persecution of Christians in muslim countries? Where are their calls for divestment and boycotts of muslim countries which deny the human rights and religious rights of Christians? The PCUSA is an abomination. I certainly hope that rank and file Presbyterians will condemn what the church is doing to Israel in their name.

Presbyterians Usher in the Jewish Holiday of Purim


Divestment and the War Against the Jews, Part 2010.

The Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUSA) is about to release a report which denounces Israel as a “racist” nation which has absolutely no historical, covenantal, or theological right to the Holy Land. The report calls for the United States to withhold financial and military aid to Israel and for boycotts and sanctions against Israel. That’s not all. The report also endorses a Palestinian “right of return” and “apologizes to Palestinians for even conceding that Israel has a right to exist.” According to the press release, it also states that Israel’s history begins only with the Holocaust and that Israel is “a nation mistakenly created by Western powers at the expense of the Palestinian people to solve the ‘Jewish problem’.”

In addition, PCUSA has also resolved to divest in companies that supply military equipment to the American Army, e.g. Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, etc.

In 2004, this Church became the first mainline Protestant denomination in America to “approve a policy of divestment from Israel.” This was rescinded, but in 2008 the Church “created a committee dominated by seven activists holding strong anti-Israel beliefs. The lone member sympathetic to Israel, quit in protest when he saw their radical agenda.”

The Simon Wiesenthal Center notes that 46 members of the US Congress and Senate are Presbyterians and fears potentially “significant repercussions in the political domain” as well as a negative “impact on interfaith relations.” They urge us all to protest directly to the top leadership of the PCUSA “to stop this dangerous campaign which denies the legitimacy and security of Israel,” and to “reach out to your Presbyterian friends.”
Continue

New Rules of Engagement

This is beyond pathetic. The rules of engagement are being furthered tightened in Afghanistan. Now the soldiers are being ordered to limit nighttime raids. If this is the administration and Pentagon's idea of "fighting" a war, we might as well send the troops home ASAP because this war is lost. Our troops are sitting ducks over there with these insane rules of engagement. If McChrystal is being ordered to do so by the White House then he should resign if he has any self-respect, respect for the troops and love of this nation. H/T Loganswarning

Forces in Afghanistan told to limit nighttime raids
By Barbara Starr

Washington (CNN) –

A new classified directive to coalition forces in Afghanistan puts restrictions on nighttime raids of Afghan homes and compounds, according to a senior U.S. official who has seen the document.
The official declined to be identified because a declassified version of the document has not been made public. The directive is signed by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, the official said.

The directive comes as the coalition seeks to reduce tension between its military forces and Afghan civilians in an effort to maintain Afghan public support.

Nighttime raids in which troops enter private homes have sparked problems for U.S. and NATO forces. The raids are viewed as overly invasive — a violation of the privacy of the home in Afghan culture — and they can turn violent.

The document orders forces to use Afghan troops at night “whenever possible” to knock on doors of residences and compounds, and to use them if forcible action is required for entry, the official said.

But the directive also orders troops to “conduct an analysis” of whether it is militarily essential to conduct a raid at night or whether it can be put off until daylight, the official said. If troops can keep a target under surveillance but wait for daylight, they then can enlist the aid of village elders, perhaps, in determining if a home or compound poses a threat, the official said.

The official emphasized that troops always have the right to defend themselves and are given leeway to use their best judgment on the battlefield.

McChrystal also is updating another directive, first issued last year, on conducting operations to minimize civilian casualties, the official said.

The updated version, which is yet to be published, will include “more clarity” for troops on how to operate in “escalation of force” incidents, such as when a vehicle approaches a checkpoint in a potentially threatening manner and troops must decide whether, and when, to fire at it. The official declined to offer further details but said the aim is to make sure even the most junior troops have full understanding of rules and procedures.

Some troops and local commanders have expressed concerns that recent rules can inhibit their ability to take action under fire.

These directives come as the coalition has been involved in several recent incidents in which civilians were inadvertently killed, and as the coalition conducts major operations in southern Afghanistan.

McChrystal released a video message to the Afghan populace apologizing for an incident this week in which 27 Afghan civilians were killed.

“I have made it clear to our forces that we are here to protect the Afghan people. I pledge to strengthen our efforts to regain your trust to build a brighter future for all Afghans,” he said in the message.

The official said the documents may be made public in the coming weeks, after current operations ease.

How Labour is Destroying England

This is a must-read about how Britain's Labor party purposely and in secret, acted to transform the country into a multicultural society through mass immigration of muslims with the goal of replacing its indigenous culture and heritage against the will of the British public. This is important because I believe this is what the democrats intend to do to this country. They want to completely alter America's demographic makeup in order to maintain their own hold on power. To start with, Obama and the democrats want to grant amnesty to illegal aliens. So we need to heed this warning from England.
The secret plot to destroy Britain’s identity


[This explains other policies and legislation that protects Islam. Is this what democracy has come down to?]

By Melanie Phillips, Daily Mail, 24 February 2010

Of all the issues of concern to the public, immigration is possibly the most explosive — and the one about which the most lies are continuing to be told.

During the period that Labour has been in office, mass immigration has simply changed the face of Britain. The total number of immigrants since 1997 is pushing three million.

Ministers claim that immigration policy has been driven principally to help the economy. They have always denied that they actually set out deliberately to change the ethnic composition of the country.

Well, now we know for a certainty that this is not true. The Government embarked on a policy of mass immigration to change Britain into a multicultural society — and they kept this momentous aim secret from the people whose votes they sought.

Worse still, they did this knowing that it ran directly counter to the wishes of those voters, whose concerns about immigration they dismissed as racist; and they further concealed official warnings that large-scale immigration would bring about significant increases in crime.

The truth about this scandal was first blurted out last October by Andrew Neather, a former Labour Party speechwriter.

He wrote that until the new points-based system limiting foreign workers was introduced in 2008 — in response to increasing public uproar — government policy for the previous eight years had been aimed at promoting mass immigration.

The ‘driving political purpose’ of this policy, wrote Neather, was ‘to make the UK truly multicultural’ — and one subsidiary motivation was ‘to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

Misters, however, went to great lengths to keep their real intentions secret from the public — with, said Neather, a ‘paranoia’ that these would reach the media — since they knew their core white working-class voters would react very badly.

Accordingly, a report about immigration by a government advisory unit, which formed the core of a landmark speech in 2000 announcing the loosening of border controls, went through several drafts before it was finally published — and the Government’s true intentions about changing Britain into a multicultural society were removed from the final version.

After revealing all this, Neather subsequently tried to backtrack, saying that his views had been twisted out of all recognition by the media. They hadn’t been.

Nevertheless, Jack Straw, who was Home Secretary at the time the immigration policy was changed, said he had read press reports of Neather’s remarks with incredulity since they were ‘the reverse of the truth’.

Now we know, however, that they were indeed the truth. We know this only because details of the advisory unit’s report which were excised from the final published version — just as Neather said — have been emerging into the public domain through Freedom of Information requests.

The pressure group MigrationWatch obtained an early draft which revealed that the Government’s intention was to encourage mass immigration for ’social objectives’ — in other words, to produce a more ethnically diverse society — but that on no fewer than six occasions this phrase was excised from the final version, published some three months later.

Now we further discover, from what was removed from seemingly another early draft, that the aim was not just to implement this policy of mass immigration without the knowledge or consent of the British people.

It was done in the full knowledge that the people actually wanted immigration reduced.

And we also discover that those who expressed such concerns were dismissed with utter contempt as racists — and it was further suggested that ministers should manipulate public opinion in an attempt to change people’s attitudes.

Well, they have certainly tried to do that by hanging the disgusting label of ‘racism’ round the neck of anyone who dares voice such concerns.

Thus the eminent and decent Labour MP Frank Field found himself smeared as a racist for daring to suggest that the rate of immigration should be reduced.

What bullying arrogance. The real prejudice is surely to believe that opposition to mass migration can never be based on any reasonable objection.

The implications of this covert policy are quite staggering. Ministers deliberately set out to change the cultural and ethnic identity of this country in secret.

They did this mainly because they hated what Britain was, a largely homogeneous society rooted in 1,000 years of history. They therefore set out to replace it by a totally new kind of multicultural society — and one in which the vast majority of newcomers could be expected to vote Labour.

They set out to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions. They set out to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another ‘multicultural’ identity in its place.

And they then had the gall to declare that to have love for or pride in that authentic British identity, and to want to protect and uphold it, was racist.

So the very deepest feelings of people for their country were damned as bigotry, for which crime they were to have their noses rubbed in mass immigration until they changed their attitudes.

What an appalling abuse of power. Yet even now they are denying that this is what they did. Yesterday, the Immigration Minister Phil Woolas blustered that the advisory unit report had not been accepted by ministers at the time.

But the fact is that mass immigration actually happened. The only thing ministers hadn’t accepted was that the truth about their intentions should be revealed to the public.

Surreally, Mr Woolas further claims that the Government has brought immigration down.

But the reductions he is talking about have taken place on the separate issue of asylum. The impact of the Government’s new points scheme upon the record rate of immigration growth has been negligible.

The truth is that these early drafts of the advisory unit’s report have blown open one of the greatest political scandals of the Labour years. At no stage did Labour’s election manifestos make any reference to a policy of mass immigration nor the party’s aim of creating a multicultural society.

What we have been subjected to is a deliberate deception of the voters and a gross abuse of democracy.

There could scarcely be a more profound abuse of the democratic process than to set out to destroy a nation’s demographic and cultural identity through a conscious deception of the people of that nation. It is an act of collective national treachery.

Now we face imminently another General Election. And now we know that in their hearts, Labour politicians hold the great mass of the public, many of them their own voters, in total contempt as racist bigots — all for wanting to live in a country whose identity they share.

There could hardly be a more worthy issue for the Conservative Party to leap upon. Yet their response is muted through their own visceral terror of appearing racist.

The resulting despair over the refusal of the mainstream parties to address this issue threatens to drive many into the arms of the truly racist British National Party.

If that happens, the fault will lie not just with Labour’s ideological malice and mendacity, but with the spinelessness of an entire political class.

Rachel Corrie

Rachel Corrie's parents filed a civil suit against the Israeli defense ministry and the trial will begin March 10 in Haifa. The international left has always claimed that she was deliberately killed by the Israelis. But how about this conclusion. Rachel Corrie's death was a deliberate act, however not by that Israeli driver, but by the ISM who in the first place had her stand in the pathway of that bulldozer and then when it was heading towards her and it was clear the driver didn't see her, instead of attempting to get her out of harms way, her fellow ISM members stood to the side snapping photos of the entire incident. Is it possible she was deliberately sacrificed for political gain by the ISM?

Evangelicals and Israel

David Newman wrongly opposes an alliance between Israel and Evangelicals.
The fact that the values of these Evangelical movements do not correspond with those of a liberal, democratic, open society goes without saying. Liberal Jewish America, from where Israel’s most important source of support - political and financial - is derived, does not view this connection in a very positive light, although it remains largely silent given the fact that it is so difficult to enlist the support of new friends these days.

What a crock! The most important source of support for Israel is most certainly not coming from liberal Jews but from the very Evangelicals the writer condemns. If anything, liberal Jews, from JStreet to the NIF, Israel Policy Forum and other like-minded groups have consistently acted to undermine Israel and give aid and comfort to its enemies. I would trust Pat Robertson any day over Jeremy Ben Ami, I would trust Pastor Hagee over MJ Rosenberg any day.

My feeling is that the liberal writer of this article, David Newman, is threatened by the potential alliance between Jews and conservative Christians and thus wants to undermine it, lest Jews finally wake-up and realize their best hope is to be politically aligned with conservatives and stop voting for democrats.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Erasing Jewish History

The "palestinians" and their supporters seek to abolish all physical evidence of Jewish historical and religious connection to the land of Israel. As the result of Bibi's plan to include Jewish landmarks in Judea and Samaria such as Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs on the government's list of heritage sites, abbas has threatened a new round of terrorism.

'Netanyahu could start a war'
By JPOST.COM STAFF
23/02/2010
Abbas: Inclusion of W. Bank sites on heritage list is a far cry from peace.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s decision to include Jewish landmarks in the West Bank in the government’s new list of heritage sites is a “severe provocation” that could lead to a new cycle of violence, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said in speech to the Belgian parliament Tuesday.

Abbas told the ministers that the inclusion of Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem and the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron on the list of sites of national importance could ignite a “war of religions” in the region.

He warned that the decision could also bring about a third intifada, adding that Netanyahu’s insistence on making the announcement only a short time after he was asked by US President Barak Obama to take confidence-building measures vis-à-vis the Palestinians.

“We have reached a very critical stage which necessitates an intensive, coordinated international effort. Settlement construction, which kills the peace process and contradicts Israel’s obligations, must be stopped,” he said, going on to refer to existing agreements such as the Road Map for Peace.

He added that the EU and the US each have important parts to play in the peace process, and that any delay in the resumption of talks would make the possibility of peace more remote.

Throughout his speech, Abbas reiterated that the impasse in Middle East peace talks can be attributed only to Israel’s refusal to accept existing agreements, and not to an alleged Palestinian refusal to return to the negotiating table.

Abbas stressed that not every issue was negotiable. If Israel wishes to begin negotiations, he said, it must stop creating facts on the ground by continuing to expand Jewish communities in Palestinian areas and in east Jerusalem.

Meanwhile on Tuesday, dozens of Palestinians held a demonstration near the Jewish enclave in Hebron in protest of Netanyahu’s decision. The protesters burned tires and hurled rocks at IDF troops stationed in the area, who retorted by using stun grenades.

Don't Let the Kooks Hijack the Conservative Movement

I'm very concerned that the Ron Paul, libertarian, isolationist wing will try to hijack the tea party movement and the GOP. These people, like the left, don't believe that islam is at war with us, they don't believe islam is a threat at all and that we should retreat from the war on terror. Instead they hold Jews and Israel responsible for islamic terror. They are every bit as dangerous to national security as the left and the Democrats. We need to get behind candidates like Colonel Allen West and make certain the neocons and Evangelicals maintain power in the Republican party. Pamela Geller had to have her own CPAC event because the main one would not bother to discuss the islamic threat since the American Conservative Union which sponsors CPAC is run by pro-muslim Grover Norquist.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Pro-jihad Rally in Paris

Jesse Petrilla filmed Jihadi riffraff staging an anti-Israel, Jew-hating march in front of the Louvre in Paris where hezbollah flags were displayed along with a picture of hassan nasrallah. Support of the Iraq insurgency, the burning of Israeli flags and chants of "alahu akbar", "we are the soldiers of mohammad" and a chant in Arabic calling for the genocide of Jews also took place.

Democrat Rep Wants to Circumvent Israel Blockade of Gaza

Why does Washington state rep. Brian baird want to help hamas? This is obviously his goal since he admits food gets through to Gaza, therefore civilians aren't wanting for basic necessities. I know that medicine also gets through. Only weapons or material which could be used for bomb-making and rockets are being blocked from entering Gaza.

It's clear that many democrats are now openly supporting hamas. Are American Jews getting the message yet that the demorats are not their friends.

Congressman calls for US to circumvent Israeli Gaza blockade
By HAVIV RETTIG GUR
21/02/2010
Rep. Brian Baird compares Strip to Berlin Blockade after third visit to Gaza since Hamas took over.

Rep. Brian Baird, a Democrat from Washington state, called on the Obama administration on Friday to “circumvent” Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

Baird spoke in Jerusalem after a two-day visit to Gaza, his third since Hamas took over the territory in 2007.

The US should circumvent Israel’s blockade, “much like we did when we circumvented the Berlin Blockade,” he said. “We would accomplish this using roll-on/off ships supplying the needed material for Palestinians to rebuild their society.”

Baird criticized Israel for being too stringent in its blockade, which he said “was established so that contraband weapons and equipment used for rockets to shell Israel will not enter Gaza.

“While there are foodstuffs entering Gaza, the shipments are tightly controlled and items such as tomato paste and pasta are sometimes restricted by the Israelis. Palestinians cannot rebuild their homes, their schools, their hospitals because they cannot import the cement needed to complete the projects. They cannot build sewage systems and prevent 55 million metric meters of sewage flow into the Mediterranean because the Israelis limit the amount of construction materials into Gaza.”

He also called for US special envoy George Mitchell to visit Gaza “to determine first-hand humanitarian needs.”

Israel has rejected Baird’s call, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor telling CNN that he wondered whether Baird’s support for a Berlin-like breaking of the blockade would have extended to a Berlin under the control of Nazi Germany. The best way to help Gaza residents, Palmor said, was “to get rid of those who took power in a bloody coup and now rule there with the bayonet.”

UK Defense Ministry Opposes Giant mosque Overlooking Army Academy

Defense chiefs fight plans to build a giant mosque overlooking Sandhurst parade ground

The Ministry Of Defence is fighting plans to build a giant mosque overlooking Sandhurst. Daily Mail
Military chiefs claim the place of worship will pose a security threat to the world-famous Army academy. They have lodged an official objection backed by 7,000 local residents who have signed a petition.


Objection: The MoD, backed by a petition signed by 7,000 local residents, is fighting plans to build a giant mosque overlooking Sandhurst

Surrey Council has already approved an application to build the mosque, which would have a huge dome and two 100ft minarets that would be just 400 yards from the soldiers' parade ground.

But security experts have warned the mosque could attract radical Islamists if it is constructed.

The true radicals are the reformers. It's the pious and devout we have to worry about.

'We have some concerns and have been checking links with known radical mosques in other areas and postings on websites,' a security source told the News Of The World.

'Police special branch has asked to brief the local council.'


Security threat: The Queen and other senior members of the royal family are regular visitors to Sandhurst

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: 'Sandhurst has objected to the plans as such a tall building would give oversight into Defence property which could prove a security risk.

'It is not because the building is a mosque that the plans are objectionable, it is because it is such a tall building.'
Continue
Even when they are taking the right position, those in power are defensive and apologetic about it. Why not acknowledge that yes, of course we object to a mosque being built which overlooks an army academy. It is muslims who represent a terrorist threat and should not even be in the country let alone have a mosque located near a military academy where they might attack soldiers. No other religious group presents such a threat and therefore we would not object to any other house of worship being built in the same place. Whoever has a problem with hearing the blunt truth being spoken, can shove it.

Monday, February 22, 2010

Women Caned in Malaysia

As I've often said, there is no such thing as moderate islam or a moderate muslim country and that islam is incompatible with freedom and democracy. The only difference among muslim countries is the degree of sharia law instituted.

In Malaysia, a country considered in the west to be "moderate", three women were caned for engaging in illicit sex and people are also caned for consuming alcohol.

Women Beaten in Malaysia under Shariah Law

Jim Kouri, CPP

As a result of Shariah law being imposed in Malaysia, Muslim women were caned on Tuesday for engaging in illicit sex, a serious crime under strict Muslim law.

The three women are reportedly the first to receive such a brutal punishment under Shariah law. According to the Home Minister, Datuk Hishmmudin Hussein, two of the women were struck six times while the third was hit four times with a "cane" or "rotan." The punishment was meted out at Malaysia's Kajang federal prison.

Under Islamic rule, Malaysians have witnessed an increase in canings as a result of the nation moving from a secular legal system to one based on the Koran and the teachings of radical imams. Many were shocked to learn that last summer, a 32-year-old woman – Kartika Shukarno – was sentenced to be caned for the crime of consuming an alcoholic beverage. While the violent sentence created a firestorm in the country, Shukarno is still awaiting the execution of the caning sentence.

Originally, Malaysia was a federal constitutional elective monarchy. The system of government in Malaysia was closely modeled on that of Westminster parliamentary system, a legacy of British colonial rule. Since independence in 1957, Malaysia has been governed by a multi-party coalition known as The Alliance.

Legislative power was divided between federal and state legislatures. The parliament consisted of the lower house, the House of Representatives (literally the "Chamber of the People"), and the upper house, the Senate (literally the "Chamber of the Nation").

The Malaysian constitution guarantees religious freedom. However, the jurisdiction of Shariah court is becoming more powerful over matters such as marriage, inheritance, conversion and child custody. Despite being the supreme courts of the land, the Civil Courts (including the Federal Court) in principle cannot overrule any decision made by the Shariah Courts.

Hishammuddin claimed that he decided to bring to public attention the punishment given to the three women because there had been “too much hype” over Kartika’s sentence.

“People are saying that no woman has been caned before and that Kartika should not be caned. Today I am announcing that we have already done it. There is no hidden agenda, we are merely executing our responsibility,” he stated during a press conference yesterday.

The staunch Muslim minister declared that the three women did not suffer any cuts or abrasions from their beatings but assured the media that the punishment had a rehabilitative effect.

“They have all repented. They are also hoping that others will not go against the teachings of the religion,” he said, adding that the sentence was meted out according to Islamic rules.

Last month, the three women were found guilty of fornication by the Federal Shariah High Court sentenced to public caning

Minister Hishammuddin assured reporters that one of the women was released last Sunday after spending a month in prison. A second woman is expected to be released later this week, while the third is serving the rest of her jail term and is expected to be freed in June 2010.

Malaysian officials with the Malaysia Penal Department claim they have advisors who are experts from the Islamic Development Department, the Shariah Law Department and the Federal Prosecutor's Office to make certain the sentences are carried out according to recognized Islamic law.

The ministry agreed on the procedure for the caning of Muslim women offenders for Shariah offenses on December 4, 2010.

“I hope there will be no more issues arising from the caning sentence which can be imposed by the Shariah Court on Muslim women to protect the sanctity of Islam,” Hishammuddin told reporters.

“Look at the message behind the punishment. Illicit sex could easily lead to other social ills such as abortion and baby dumping. The punishment serves as a proposed solution for other social problems," he added.

Latest Obama Power Grab

The answer to skyrocketing health insurance rates is to have more competition. Allow insurance companies to operate across state lines and the marketplace would then result in lower rates. But Obama and the dems are unwilling to do that because then it would take away their justification for a huge federal government and democrat party power grab.

Obama to Urge Oversight of Insurers’ Rate Increases
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN and ROBERT PEAR

WASHINGTON — President Obama will propose on Monday giving the federal government new power to block excessive rate increases by health insurance companies, as he rolls out comprehensive legislation to revamp the nation’s health care system, White House officials said Sunday.

The president’s legislation aims to bridge differences between the bills adopted by the House and Senate late last year, and to frame his debate with Republicans over health policy at a televised meeting on Thursday.

By focusing on the effort to tighten regulation of insurance costs, a new element not included in either the House or Senate bills, Mr. Obama is seizing on outrage over recent premium increases of up to 39 percent announced by Anthem Blue Cross of California and moving to portray the Democrats’ health overhaul as a way to protect Americans from profiteering insurers.

Congressional Republicans have long denounced the Democrats’ legislation as a “government takeover” of health care. And while they are likely to resist any expansion of federal authority over existing state regulators, they will face a tough balancing act at the meeting with the president to avoid appearing as if they are willing to allow steep premium increases like those by Anthem.
Continue reading

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Haveil Havalim

Edition #257 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is up at Ki Yachol Nuchal!

Obama's Meeting with the Dalai Lama

Obama is a disgrace. To the vicious, brutal and violent muslim rulers he bows to. To the peaceful Dalai Lama he literally treats like trash. In order not to upset China, Obama has a low-key meeting with the Dalai Lama at the White House and the White House makes him leave through an exit where there's trash bags outside.

Europe's Misplaced Outrage

Passport ‘rage’
EDITORIAL
19/02/2010
The pigheaded refusal to acknowledge that sometimes the ends justify the means reflects Europe's moral impoverishment.

Dahu Khalfan Tamim now has a world-class reputation for detective work. The head of the Dubai police swiftly determined that Hamas’s Mahmoud Mabhouh did not die of natural causes at the five-star Bustan Rotana Hotel on Jan. 20. He was assassinated.

Let’s for the sake of argument grant that Israel did away with Mabhouh; that he was not killed by Iran or over some intra-Palestinian dispute, and that clues pointing to Israeli culpability are genuine.

Mabhouh certainly deserved to be assassinated by Israel. Hamas declared war on Israel. And he co-founded its military wing and was personally involved in the (separate) 1989 killings of IDF soldiers Ilan Sa’adon and Avi Sasportas.

Mabhouh was a key link in the unlawful syndicate which delivers Iranian weapons to Gaza. He was apparently tasked with importing an arsenal that would make life hellish for Israelis living in metropolitan Tel Aviv. He was, perhaps, Hamas’s equivalent to Hizbullah’s Imad Mughniyeh, whose car blew up in Damascus two years ago.

YOU CAN tell a great deal about the moral compass and political leanings of a society by observing its reaction to the Mabhouh liquidation.

There is unease in Europe because the purported assassins identified by Dubai were travelling under forged French, German, Irish and British passports; and identities of Israelis with dual-citizenship were utilized.

Even The Times of London, whose editorial page has been sympathetic toward Israel, expressed chagrin over the affair, saying this country had shown poor regard for the “future security of British passport holders overseas.” Frankly, there is little reason to think that the tradecraft employed in this assassination – which we will not second guess at this stage – jeopardizes anyone.

Actually, what troubles us is the question of whose passport Mabhouh was traveling under and why he was allowed to enter neutral Dubai on gun-running business.

Of course, that’s not how the British see it. The BBC’s Jeremy Bowen warned that if Israel had used British passports for “nefarious” purposes – meaning sending Mabhouh to his Maker – Bowen expected, or would it be more accurate to say, hoped for, “a crisis” in relations between London and Jerusalem.

The Guardian quoted a Foreign Office mandarin as gloating: “Relations were in the freezer before this. They are in the deep freeze now.” The paper then grumbled about the British government’s “supine” response to the assassination, editorializing against the government’s proposal to lift the threat of lawfare. The Guardian wants visiting Israeli ministers to continue to worry about facing Palestinian-inspired “war crimes” charges.

No loss. I would hardly call Britain an ally of Israel anyway. In fact there's a good case to be made that England is an outright enemy of Israel.

As usual no outrage that dubai allowed itself to be a haven for hamas, weapons smuggling from Iran to hamas, money laundering for islamic terrorists and so forth. No outrage over this terrorist's murder of Israelis. And now interpol is treating the Mossad like criminals while hamas terrorists operate freely around the world, without fear that interpol will come after them. It really is an insane, upside down world. And Europe is completely in the grip of moral depravity. I would advise the Jews of Europe to leave as soon as possible because it will only get worse.

As far as I can see, Europe is a lost cause and deservedly so. I have come to the point where I do not care and in fact I'm glad to see Europe go down due to its vicious hostility and hatred towards Israel and Jews. And also for Europe's decades long dirty deals with the oil producing muslim states and anti-Zionist policies. Perhaps they are receiving divine retribution.

French FM Wants the Immediate Creation of Pali State

The foreign minster of France said that the justifiable assassination of hamas terrorist mahmoud al mabhouh proves the need for a palestinian state. Of course what it really proves is that the "palestinians" in no way deserve or can be trusted with statehood since they continue to support terrorism and the obliteration of Israel. The French foreign minister should explain how creating another islamic terror state promotes peace.

French FM: Dubai killing proves need for Palestinian state

By News Agencies

Tags: Dubai Killing, Mossad




The Foreign Minister of France said in an interview Saturday that the January assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud al Mabhouh in Dubai highlights the need for an immediate recognition of a Palestinian state.

"(The case) shows the need for peace and a Palestinian state, immediately," Bernard Kouchner told the French Journal du Dimanche.

Kouchner added that the assassination, which is believed by many to have been carried out by the Mossad, underscores the need for peace in the Middle East.

The French Foreign Minister also commented on Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas's acceptance of a United States proposal that he hold indirect talks with Israel under Washington's mediation, and said that he could envision the recognition of a Palestinian state even before the borders were negotiated.

"France is training Palestinian police, businesses are being created in the West Bank... It follows that one can envision the proclamation soon of a Palestinian state, and its immediate recognition by the international community, even before negotiating its borders," Kouchner said.

Kouchner's comments came ahead of a visit to Paris by Abbas next week, and after Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said he could see an independent Palestinian state in 2011 regardless of whether peace talks have advanced with Israel.

"If by mid-2011, the political process has not ended the (Israeli) occupation, I would bet that the developed state of Palestinian infrastructure and institutions will be such that the pressure will force Israel to give up its occupation," Fayyad said in an interview published in French media on Friday.

Abbas is due to meet with Kouchner in Paris on February 21 and with French President Nicolas Sarkozy the following day, a senior Palestinian official said this week on condition of anonymity.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Joseph Stack

The media is already trying to tie this guy to the tea party movement, labeling him a "right winger" and calling this an act of terrorism. Yet Stack, in his manifesto, rails against capitalism, Bush and the wealthy, our health care system, insurance companies and corporations. He actually sounds like a leftist. And his wasn't an act of terrorism. He wasn't involved in any organized movement with thousands of followers being indoctrinated into perpetrating violence against unbelievers. Meanwhile the media still refuses to call the Fort Hood shooting an act of terrorism let alone an act of islamic jihad. This is among the reasons why I despise the mainstream media and why I believe they are a force for evil.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Assassination of hamas Terrorist

Why all the media controversy and anger over the killing of a terrorist but no outrage over the murders he committed or the fact that Dubai is harboring and supporting hamas? Is it any wonder the west is losing the war to the muslims? But then again the western media doesn't consider terrorists who murder Israelis to really be terrorists.

I was watching Anderson Cooper and I don't know the name of the dirtbag he was interviewing, but the guy said that unlike Afghanistan or Iraq, Dubai is not a warzone and that's why Israel is in trouble for this assassination. In trouble with who and what can they do about it.

If the UAE makes itself a haven for terrorists, terrorist smuggling operations and a place where terrorist money is moved and is friendly toward Iran, then they have made themselves into a front in the war on terror-on the side of the terrorists. Israel was completely justified in assassinating this terrorist or any terrorists wherever they hide.

Mahmoud al-Mabhouh: To Kill a Terrorist - Exclusive Analysis
The assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh has touched off a great deal of outrage by the same media organizations and countries that typically ignore the murders committed by Islamic terrorists. Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was a Muslim Brotherhood member and a co-founder of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the "armed wing" of Hamas. Essentially Mahmoud was a co-founder of the terrorist sub-group responsible for more than half of the murders of Israelis that have taken place over the last decade alone.


If you're wondering what that long string of syllables, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, means. It's in memory of Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, a Muslim religious leader who founded the "Black Hand" terrorist group, the first modern day Muslim terrorist group in Israel, which murdered Jewish farmers and tried to launch an uprising in order to create an Arab-Islamic in place of Israel. The good Sheikh worked together with the Mufti of Jerusalem, who went on to help Hitler to carry out the Holocaust. Qassam never had the chance to do the same, as he was killed in 1935 while hiding in a cave after the murder of a Jewish police officer.

The only difference between Mahmoud al-Mabhouh and his inspiration Sheikh Al-Qassam, is that the latter met his end in a cave and the former in a hotel room. Both men were committed and fanatical Islamic terrorists who plotted to drown the region in blood in the name of their Jihad. Mahmoud al-Mabhouh's presence in Dubai was no casual vacation trip. Mabnouh had become a key figure in the weapons smuggling network between Hamas and its Iranian backers. Meanwhile Dubai has become an vital link in the chain of international terrorist operations. Its global import-export connections combined with the support of UAE leader Sheikh Zayed for Hamas, and Dubai's proximity to Iran make it a mecca for terrorist smuggling operations.

If you want to do business with Iran, the best way is to use a proxy in Dubai. This makes Dubai a perfect center for Iranian links to terrorists around the world. Dubai is a legitimate business destination that will raise the fewest suspicions of just about any Middle Eastern destination. The UAE rulers are very friendly to Iran and to such groups as Hamas. Last month Sheikh Zayed met with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, who had also been the target of an Israeli assassination attempt. Dubai serves as one way for Iran to move money and goods over to Hamas through front organizations that are actually Iranian run, through banks that do business with Iran while pretending to do business only in Dubai, and through ports controlled by Dubai Ports World, which is itself a subsidiary of the government.

Mahmoud al-Mabhouh who had received linguistics training in Syria, possessed an engineering background and had spent much of his adult life living in different Arab countries and forming radical contacts there was the perfect man to oversee a regional weapons smuggling network. And Dubai was the perfect place for him to do business. That confluence in turn made Dubai the perfect place for al-Mabhouh's assassination, not simply because he was there, but because it was meant to send a message. The very visible nature of the operation demonstrated that Dubai was not a safe zone for terrorists, despite its distance from Israel and a terrorist friendly government.


The publicity accompanying the assassination was a feature not a bug. Sheikh Mohammed is being sent a message that at a critical time when Dubai needs foreign investment, he has to choose between backing terrorists and stabilizing his economy. The killing of al-Mabhouh creates the very association between Dubai and Islamic terrorism that it would like to avoid. Dubai would like to be thought of as representing fun in the sun and a growing business environment, even as the UAE funds Islamic extremism. The assassination shines light on the Islamic dark side of Dubai and it will create nervousness among visiting business executives. A British newspaper article wonders if the German executives of firms who produce parts for Iran's nuclear reactors will also be subject to assassination. Of course they won't be, but having them worry about it may keep them out of the Iran business and out of Dubai.
Continue reading

Thursday, February 18, 2010

The Left Enables Tyrants

The left believes the problem in the world is America and Israel, not the islamic jihadists, terror states and dictatorships of the Middle East. So they seek to curb American and Israeli military power, and if they have their way Iran will acquire nuclear weapons which will result in a second holocaust.

The left has historically enabled mass murder and genocide under the guise of "peace". In the name of peace in our time, they enabled WW2 and the holocaust. The "peace" movement drove America out of Vietnam and thus enabled the killing fields of Cambodia. The left also supported mass murderers Stalin and Mao.

Why is Ahmadinejad Smiling?
Sprightly Ahmadinejad tours nuclear facilities, having stolen an election he marches on as his police batter and protesters. And everywhere he goes, he smiles his trademark loopy smile. The smile of a psychopath or a saint.


Why is Ahmadinejad smiling? The answer is not a terribly complicated one. With every step he takes and every day that he remains in power, he discredits the most deeply held ideas of Western liberals about the power of diplomacy to resolve conflicts and internal civil disobedience to achieve peaceful regime change. Despite years of diplomatic and hundreds of thousands of protesters taking to the streets-- Ahmadinejad's grip on power remains as secure as ever.

Walking over the bodies of student protesters, of political dissidents, of the thousands killed by the wars he has touched off, he continues to taunt the rest of the world to do anything about it. And the rest of the world has done nothing except talk. And as Ahmadinejad has demonstrated, talk counts for nothing at all.

While Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be detached from ordinary reality, living in an Islamic version of Charles Manson's fantasies about touching off a spectacular war in order to bring on a new age, he understands his enemies well enough to call them out on their weakness. Like every other Islamic terrorist and warlord, Ahmadinejad sees diplomacy as weakness behind a mask of civility. And like just about every strongman in the world, he laughs at it.

Ahmadinejad may be a monster, but there are no shortage of monsters in the Middle East. Saddam Hussein was just as bad, yet much of the American and European left proved eager to shut their eyes to the rape rooms, to Uday's horrors of mangled limbs and broken fingers, to the ethnic cleansing and gassing-- while demanding that we respect Saddam's sovereignty. Today those very same people pat themselves on the back, as if defending the right of a tyrant to keep killing his own people were some great act of moral courage.

But even Saddam and Ahmadinejad are not particularly unique, because monsters proliferate in the Middle East like mushrooms after a rainstorm, growing off the oil money that their enemies send them, which they exchange for weapons and payments to their own loyalists to secure their base of power. Every petrodollar sent to the Middle East means death of a certain kind, whether it's the death of a passerby by a suicide bomb in Basra funded by Iranian or Saudi money, the death of an imported Indian contract worker in Dubai or the murder of an African Sudanese in Sudan. Either way oil money is death money, and the world knows it, and yet does nothing. No wonder Ahmadinejad keeps on smiling.
Continue reading

Robert Spencer Interview

Robert Spencer discusses his book "The Truth About Muhammad" on Pat Robertson's show on CBN, one of the few programs you are ever likely to see him interviewed on. The msm has no interest in featuring any guests who tell the truth about islam, that includes FOX which has been compromised by saudi money.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Sarah Derangement Syndrome

This is another example of what kind of sub-human monsters exist on the left. These people are deranged, morally degenerate and evil. They are completely devoid of any morals or human decency. This among other reasons is why the left needs to be rendered politically irrelevant for the sake of our great nation. I think Sarah Palin's daughter was being too kind in describing those despicable cowards who made fun of her downs syndrome brother. And the entertainment industry is riddled with degenerates and deviants. They are terrified of Sarah because they know that she and her values connect with the majority of normal Americans. The more vicious they are, the more we embrace her.

Fox's 'Family Guy' takes on Sarah Palin by appearing to mock her son Trig's Down syndrome

BY Bill Hutchinson
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Monday, February 15th 2010, 4:00 AM

Handout
'Family Guy' appeared to make fun of Sarah Palin's son Trig, who has Down syndrome.


Fox could be heading to Sarah Palin's doghouse after the animated show "Family Guy" appeared to mock her son's Down syndrome on Sunday night.

In the taste-challenged episode, one of the show's characters dates a woman who apparently suffers from Down syndrome. The woman makes comparisons to Palin's 22-month-old son, Trig.

"My dad's an accountant, and my mom's the former governor of Alaska," the mentally disabled character said, without mentioning any names.

The irreverent cartoon stepped over the line just days after Palin lambasted both White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and radio talkmeister Rush Limbaugh for using the word "retard," which she considers an unacceptable slur.

There was no immediate comment from Palin, who recently became a Fox News contributor.

The former Republican Vice Presidential candidate demanded that Emanuel be fired for using the r-word to describe liberal activists in a closed-door meeting last summer.

She also called Limbaugh "disrespectful" for using the word during his program.

Roger Cohen Lectures Israel Again

Roger Cohen lectures Israel again.

Hard Mideast Truths

By ROGER COHEN
Published: February 11, 2010

NEW YORK — For over a century now, Zionism and Arab nationalism have failed to find an accommodation in the Holy Land. Both movements attempted to fill the space left by collapsed empire, and it has been left to the quasi-empire, the United States, to try to coax them to peaceful coexistence. The attempt has failed.

President Barack Obama came to office more than a year ago promising new thinking, outreach to the Muslim world, and relentless focus on Israel-Palestine. But nice speeches have given way to sullen stalemate. I am told Obama and the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have a zero-chemistry relationship.

Domestic U.S. politics constrain innovative thought — even open debate — on the process without end that is the peace search. As Aaron David Miller, who long labored in the trenches of that process, once observed, the United States ends up as “Israel’s lawyer” rather than an honest broker. The upside for an American congressman in speaking out for Palestine is nonexistent.

I don’t see these constraints shifting much, but the need for Obama to honor his election promise grows. The conflict gnaws at U.S. security, eats away at whatever remote possibility of a two-state solution is left, clouds Israel’s future, scatters Palestinians and devours every attempt to bridge the West and Islam.

Here’s what I believe. Centuries of persecution culminating in the Holocaust created a moral imperative for a Jewish homeland, Israel, and demand of America that it safeguard that nation in the breach.

But past persecution of the Jews cannot be a license to subjugate another people, the Palestinians. Nor can the solemn U.S. promise to stand by Israel be a blank check to the Jewish state when its policies undermine stated American aims.

People like Cohen just won't accept the fact that it isn't Israel preventing a "palestinian" state, it is the "palestinians" who continuously reject statehood because it is not a two-state solution they seek. What they really want is the obliteration of the Jewish state. So They will not accept a state as long as it means the continued existence of Israel, regardless of the borders. Why is that so hard for the Roger Cohens of the world to grasp?

How do you begin to dialogue with people who continue to teach their children in schools, mosques and the media to hate Jews and make heroes out of so-called "martyrs" who murder Israelis? It is not possible. Yet supposedly intelligent people like Cohen persist in pushing negotiations and then blame Israel for their failure.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Brennan's sickening Speech at NYU

John Brennan speaks before an audience of muslims at NYU. The man is clearly a full-fledged dhimmi.

Brennan, Unruffled, Talks Terror at NYU

President Barack Obama's embattled counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, delivered an emphatic defense Saturday of the Obama administration's rhetorical approach to terrorism — and also slipped in a few criticisms of Bush administration policies he suggested alienated Muslims at home and abroad.

In a speech at New York University’s law school, Brennan gave no nod to the calls for his resignation last week from the top Republicans on the House and Senate Intelligence committees. [Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) also joined that bandwagon Sunday.]

Brennan seemed at ease speaking to the largely Muslim audience, which included Islamic law students. In fact, he broke out his Arabic at some length, drawing a warm reaction from the crowd. (Scroll to 5:43 in the first video below for that chunk. I think I hear the words youth and student in there.)

To me, the most interesting revelation was that Brennan, who has a hard-edged, tough-cop image, once traveled through Indonesia sporting an earring and long hair.

Some of the most newsworthy stuff came during a lengthy Q-and-A session that the White House just posted on the Web. In response to a questioner who wants a New York City trial for alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Brennan was noncommittal but seemed to favor a civilian trial if practicalities could be worked out.

"As far as support from the community and the funding requirement, the most important thing to keep in mind is we need to bring him to justice in an American court," Brennan said, according to the New York Daily News. “Whether it happens in New York, Pennsylvania or Virginia, where will funding come from? ... Clearly, this is an issue people in the city feel strongly about. … We are trying to push this forward as best we can, but we also need nonobstruction from certain forces in our government. … There are stiff winds delaying us from bringing this man to justice.”

While figures like former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani have accused Obama of being soft on terrorism because he avoids terms like “war on terror” and “jihadist,” Brennan strongly endorsed the president’s approach.

“They are not jihadists, for jihad is a holy struggle, an effort to purify for a legitimate purpose, and there is nothing — absolutely nothing — holy or pure or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children,” Brennan said. “We are not waging a war against terrorism because terrorism is but a tactic that will never be defeated, any more than a tactics of war will. Rather, such thinking is a recipe for endless conflict. ... We are at war with Al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and any comment to the contrary is just inaccurate. We will destroy that organization.”

Brennan also charged that some actions by the U.S. government, presumably the Bush administration, underscored perceptions that the U.S. was in conflict with Islam. He cited as examples of overreach: “Violations of the Patriot Act. Surveillance that has been excessive. Policies perceived as profiling. Overinclusive no-fly lists subjecting law-abiding individuals to unnecessary searches and inconvenience. Creating an unhelpful atmosphere around many Muslim charities that made many Muslims hesitant to fulfill their sacred obligation of Zakat.”

Brennan’s statement that some individuals, presumably Muslims, were subjected to “excessive” surveillance is one I have not heard before from government officials and one that will hearten civil liberties advocates who have claimed that mosques were subjected to unwarranted scrutiny.

This speech is absolutely pathetic. For this speech alone he ought to be fired. In the first place he has bought into, or at least pretended to buy into the soft and fuzzy nonsense that jihad is a personal inner struggle to improve oneself. Jihad most certainly means holy war against infidels to force them to submit to islam, convert or be killed and to bring about a global muslim caliphate. Murdering innocent infidel men, women and children very much comports with islam. It is true we are not engaged in a war with terrorism, which is a tactic of war, but we ARE engaged in a war with islam, not simply al qaeda and its allies who's motivation to wage war comes from the koran and hadiths. They cannot be treated as separate.

What profiling? Our government has gone out of its way NOT to profile muslims and instead subjecting everybody to unnecessary searches and inconvenience. Why is it somehow a violation of rights to single out muslims but OK if its done to everyone? That makes no sense. With regard to the poor muslims being hesitant to fulfill their obligation to zakat, there is every reason to be suspicious of muslim charities since they are all fronts for terrorism. I should hope the authorities are watching these organizations, but I doubt it.

At times, Brennan suggested that the entirety of the American Muslim community has always stood 100 percent behind U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. "America has rarely noticed that American Muslims, such as yourself, have always denounced violent extremism," Brennan said, citing the head of the NYU center.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Groups such as CAIR have been doing everything in their power to undermine our anti-terrorism efforts. And if the muslim community denounces violence on its behalf as Brennan claims, then why is it that in the country's largest muslim community, the Detroit area, they couldn't get more than double digit numbers to show up at an anti-terrorism rally last month when the panty bomber was being arraigned?

Overall, a sickening, pandering, pathetic speech. And these are the type of people responsible for safeguarding America. It doesn't make you sleep well at night.

Americans Support Israel

Jeffrey Goldberg wrongly claims that the Likud is alienating Americans from Israel.

By Jeffry Goldberg, The Atlantic

A very smart bit of analysis from Blake Hounshell:
Sullivan’s criticism of Israel ought to worry defenders of the Jewish state, then, because he is a bellwether for a broader shift in American media and society that has happened over the last few years. Israel is using up a lot of the goodwill it had built up in the 1990s, when eminent statesmen like Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres made good-faith efforts toward peace with the Palestinians. Since then, the country has been governed by a series of unimaginative right-wing leaders who have pandered constantly to their settler base and chosen to solve political problems through the use of force. Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party may have their fingers on the pulse of their public right now, but their agenda is not one that appeals to most Americans, who strongly support Israel’s right to exist but have little interest in underwriting the permanent occupation of the West Bank.


I don’t think Andrew is necessarily a bellwether on this — he’s a bit too mercurial — but as a general proposition I think Hounshell has it right. It seems as if many people in the American elite have decided that Israel is just as dysfunctional (and, sometimes, as brutal) as its Arab foes. Americans don’t like intractable crises, and the Israeli government needs to understand this (it needs to understand, as well, that young American Jews are less likely to be reflexive defenders of Israel than their parents are). At the risk of repeating myself (unavoidable on a blog, I guess), it will be risky for Israel to pull out its settlements from the West Bank, but it will be fatal for Israel to remain in the settlements, for moral and demographic reasons.

What Israel needs is a leader who will step forward and say, “Here is the way things should look,” and then present an outline for the creation of a viable Palestine. The settlers will go nuts, but that’s what they do. Hamas will go nuts, because that’s what it does. But Hounshell is right: What is needed is a Rabin. I tend to think that Netanyahu has the potential to be this leader. Maybe it’s more a hope than a reality at this point, but only someone from the right can bring the majority of Israelis to the painful compromises that are obviously necessary. And, to make the obvious point, one of the reasons this compromise is necessary is because American public opinion is one of Israel’s most important battlegrounds.

Sullivan, Hounshell(whoever the hell he is) and Goldberg have it completely wrong. Israel’s support has increased in America in recent years. And while yes, the liberal democrat elite has turned against Israel, Israel still has solid support amongst the GOP and the majority of Christian Americans. The problem with the three aforementioned is that they have lived in a Washington and acedemia bubble for so long, they have no idea what real Americans think. The opinions of the elite have no relation to the feelings of ordinary Americans. They also get it wrong when it comes to domestic issues. Israel is NOT losing support amongst Americans.

Furthermore I am not the least bit worried about sullivan’s opinion of Israel. The idea that we ought to be, is laughable. He is first of all a lunatic leftist and secondly is irrelevant. Most Americans don’t even know who he is. Only his fellow elites in the media think he is important. In fact, the entire political and media establishment grossly overestimates their own relevance.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Ayalon Calls for Population Swap

It's reasonable to ask, if Jews are to be forbidden to live in a "palestinian" state, then why should Arabs live in Israel? If there is going to be a two-state solution, which I oppose, then at least it's reasonable to expect reciprocity. But being that there is a double standard against Jews, Ayalon's idea will be dismissed as "racist". However its not considered racist if Arabs demand a Judenrein state.
Ayalon touts population swap in peace deal


By Barak Ravid, Jack Khoury and Jonathan Lis, Haaretz

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon on Saturday spoke out on the peace process, saying that a deal between Israel and the Palestinians could include a swap comprising both land and populations, according to an interview published in the London-based Arabic daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat.

Ayalon suggested that Israel would trade the concentration of Israeli Arab towns and villages in the north known as “the triangle” in exchange for Israeli settlement blocs in the West Bank. He added, however, that the swap would not include cities such as Nazareth.

Ayalon said such an exchange would maintain territorial integrity and demographics in both Israel and a Palestinian state.

“I am talking about land that has territorial contiguity,” said Ayalon. “We don’t want to get into surgical operations at this stage, but what is important is that the acceptance of this idea will give Jews a message of goodwill toward peace, since a majority of Jews will live in Israel and a majority of Palestinians will live in Palestine.”

Ayalon denied that this was an attempt to rid Israel of the country’s Arabs.

“I am not saying that Israel wants to get rid of Israeli Arabs, but we know from experience that countries are divided based on demographic lines, and a good example of that is the former Soviet Union,” Ayalon told the newspaper.

“Israel’s Arabs who are moved to Palestine will also help the Palestinian state economically.”

He added that if the Palestinians want Israel to accept their self-determination, they must accept Israel’s right to define itself as a Jewish state.

Israeli Arab MK Ahmed Tibi (United Arab List-Ta’al chairman) responded to Ayalon’s remarks, saying they reflect a “complete defect in the understanding of the basic values of democracy and civil rights.”

“We are not chess pieces,” said Tibi. “We did not arrive in this country on planes and we did not immigrate here. We do not want to expel anyone from the borders of this country, but if someone wants to expel us, I will say this: He who got here last leaves first. That way, there will be fewer fascists in Israel.”
Continue reading
If the muslims leave there will be fewer fascists in Israel. I find it interesting that the Arabs are not anxious to leave the “racist” “oppressive” Jewish state and live amongst their brethren in a newly formed “palestine” which they demand to be created.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Haveil Havalim

The latest edition of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is up at Shiloh Musings.

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Israel and Iran

I was watching greta Van Susteran and she was interviewing Rick Santorum regarding the subject of Iran. And while Greta acknowledged that Iran desires to use its nuclear weapons to obliterate Israel, in the very next sentence she asks: "How do we contain Israel"? Excuse me? Iran threatens a nuclear holocaust and Greta's priority is to restrain Israel? That is so typical of liberals and members of the msm. Those pesky Jews in the desert insist on living, thereby making life uncomfortable for the likes of greta van susteran, obviously afraid the muslim world will get angry and take it out on us should Israel use its military against Iran to prevent another holocaust. Shame on you Greta, you make me sick! I was pleased that Santorum said "I'm not sure we want to contain Israel".

Goldstone Continues to Lose Credibility

The Goldstone Report continues to lose credibility as another viciously anti-Israel person by the name of Col. Desmond Travers was part of the UN fact finding mission. Israel should not give any credibility to Goldstone by conducting an inquiry of Operation Cast Lead, since the very purpose of Goldstone was to declare Israel guilty of "war crimes" and thus the report was tailored to comply with its pre-determined conclusions. Besides why should Israel's military operations be singled out for scrutiny by the international community? How about a similar Goldstone report regarding saudi arabia and yemen for its military offensive against al Houthi rebels?

New Revelations About the UN Goldstone Report that Seriously Undermine its Credibility

Dore Gold and Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi, JCPA

Col. (ret.) Desmond Travers was one of the four members of the UN Fact Finding Mission that produced what is widely called the Goldstone Report. The Mission investigated Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip between December 27, 2008 and January 18, 2009. Travers joined the Irish Defense Forces in 1961 and retired after forty years. As the only former officer who belonged to Justice Richard Goldstone’s team, he was the senior figure responsible for the military analysis that provided the basis for condemning Israel for war crimes.

After following his repeated public appearances with the other mission members in July 2009, and especially in light of his most recent interviews, serious flaws have now become evident in the methodology he followed, in his collection and processing of data, and in the conclusions he draws. In the past, the flaws in the Goldstone report, and especially its lack of balance, have been criticized by the London Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Economist, but the fundamental problems of its military analysis have not been fully addressed. In the material presented here, this becomes evident in four specific ways:

1. A Fundamental Bias against the Israel Defense Forces

During the Mission’s collection of testimonies from Palestinian psychologists in the Gaza Strip, Travers asked them straight out to explain how Israeli soldiers could kill Palestinian children in front of their parents. In an interview with Middle East Monitor, on February 2, 2010, he asserted that in the past Israeli soldiers had “taken out and deliberately shot” Irish peacekeeping forces in Southern Lebanon. Both of these statements by Travers are completely false. It should be stressed that one of the most vicious and unsubstantiated conclusions in the Goldstone Report is the suggestion that Israel deliberately killed Palestinian civilians.

While Travers assumes the worst of intentions on the part of the Israel Defense Forces, he praises Hamas for their cooperation with the Mission. When he was asked about Hamas intimidation that affected the Mission’s inquiries, he replied that that there was “none whatsoever.” Yet the Goldstone Report itself noted in Paragraph 440 that those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of Palestinian armed groups because of a “fear of reprisals.” He rejects the notion that Hamas shielded its forces in the civilian population and does not accept the idea that Israel faced asymmetric warfare.

2. False Information Reported About Weapons Systems

Travers comes up with a story that the IDF had unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV’s) that could obtain a “thermal signature” on a Gaza house and detect that there were large numbers of people inside. Incredibly, he then suggests that with this information that certain houses were “packed with people,” the Israeli military would then deliberately order a missile strike on these populated homes. The primary technical problem with his theory is that Israel does not have UAV’s that can see though houses and pick up a thermal signature. More importantly, Israel used UAV’s to monitor that Palestinian civilians left houses that had received multiple warnings, precisely because Israel sought to minimize civilian casualties, a fact that Travers could not fathom, because of his own clear biases.

3. Completely Inaccurate Data

Travers rejects that Israel began military operations against the Gaza Strip on December 27, 2008 as an act of self-defense in response to Hamas rockets. He bases this idea on a “fact” that he presents that in the month prior to start of the war, there were only “something like two” rockets that fell on Israel. Israeli military sources found that there were in fact 32 rockets fired from Gaza at Israel over three days alone–between December 16 and 18, 2008. He adds to his analysis that at this time Hamas sought to extend the tahdiya, or lull arrangement–which he called a cease-fire. Yet the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas announced on December 17 that the lull would come to an end two days later and would not be renewed. The head of the Hamas political bureau in Damascus, Khaled Mashaal, announced the end of the lull on December 14. To say that Hamas wanted to continue the lull is a complete distortion of events.

In his Middle East Monitor interview, Travers states that he “only came across two incidents of where there was an actual combat situation” - the exchange of fire between Israel and Hamas. Because he minimizes the possibility that Israel was engaged in real combat in the Gaza Strip, it follows that he naturally conclude that Israel was essentially attacking non-combatants during Operation Cast Lead.

4. Lack of Professionalism in Conducting Thorough Investigations

Travers relies on his own prejudices when he looks into the question of whether Gazan Mosques had been militarized by Hamas and turned into weapons depots. In an interview with Harpers, published on October 29, 2009, Travers makes a sweeping generalization: “We found no evidence that mosques were used to store munitions.” He then dismissed those who suggested that was the case by saying: “Those charges reflect Western perceptions in some quarters that Islam is a violent religion.” How many mosques did Travers investigate? He admits that the Mission only checked two mosques.

Of course, Israel produced photographic proof that large amounts of weapons were stored in mosques, like the Zaytun Mosque. In a subsequent interview, Travers rejected the Israeli proof: “I do not believe the photographs.” He described the photographs as “spurious.” Travers appears to be bothered by proof that contradicts the conclusions he reaches on the basis of a very limited investigation. In early 2010, Colonel Tim Collins, a British veteran of the Iraq War, visited Gaza for BBC Newsnight and inspected the ruins of a mosque that Israel had destroyed because it had been a weapons depot. He found that there was evidence of secondary explosions cause by explosives stored in the mosque cellar. Travers clearly did not make the effort that Collins made.

In his questioning of Palestinian witnesses in the Gaza Strip, Travers does not ask the questions that a military advisor should raise. He did not ask those giving testimony if they were member of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam units of Hamas and were combatants. He also failed to ask them straight out if their homes had been used to store munitions, like Grad rockets. Instead, his questions reflected his ideological bias.

Travers most recent interview also had a disturbing additional element. When addressing the role of British officers in defending Israel’s claims, Travers suddenly adds: “Britain’s foreign policy interests in the Middle East seem to be influenced strongly by Jewish lobbyists.” Travers implies that British Jews have interests that differ from Britain’s own national interests and that Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government is influenced by these considerations. This statement, unless corrected, places Travers is a position in which his views are suspect of being motivated by anti-Semitic prejudices. Even without this last statement, he clearly emerges as an individual who is not qualified to take part in any serious fact-finding mission and the U.N. should not seek his services in the future. Given his statements, Justice Richard Goldstone should repudiate Col. Travers and completely reject the conclusions that he reached as a result of his work.

This is laughable. There are those who are so far around the bend with hatred of the Jewish state that they actually believe this. As anti-Israel as Britain is, it’s still not enough for insane people like travers. The reality however is that Britain’s foreign policy interests are influenced strongly by saudi lobbyists.

Friday, February 12, 2010

NIF Misleads Donors

Like J Street, NIF too claims to be protecting Israel’s interests and security while it actually aids and abets its enemies.

NIF is nothing short of a subversive, treasonous anti-Zionist organization who’s aim is to bring about the dissolution of Israel as a Jewish state. The group’s name itself tells us all we need to know about its goals. They aim for a “new” Israel, a post-Zionist, post-Jewish Israel and in its place an arab-muslim state.

So on what grounds is NIF attempting to sue Im Tirtzu for? All it did was simply expose the organizations which NIF funds. Organizations that provided testimony to the Goldstone group, which makes NIF itself responsible for the slanderous charges in Goldstone.

The Im Tirtzu organization accuses the New Israel Fund of financing Israeli organizations which Judge Richard Goldstone used for information to accuse the Israel Defense Forces of "war crimes."

The fund's response, as is the wont of radical leftist organizations under fire, was to smear its critics as "fascists".Granted, the NIF's president, Naomi Chazan, signed a petition that defined the IDF's operations in Gaza as "terror against civilians" and demanded that Israel abide by "all UN resolutions relating to the conflict" (including 194, which Palestinians interpret as granting them a "right of return"). Nevertheless, the personal campaign against her is a mistake.

The NIF's many supporters in the media and among political organizations (which benefit from the fund, both directly and indirectly) have used this personal campaign to divert the debate from the fund's subversive goal (a "new Israel," not Jewish or Zionist), which it has furthered by donating more than $200 million thus far to hundreds of anti-Zionist organizations (I have a list, if anyone is interested).

Adalah - The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel - has used its NIF funding to submit dozens of petitions to the High Court of Justice that seek to reduce and even abolish Israel's identity as a Jewish state.

"Israel must recognize the [Palestinian] refugees' right of return, on the basis of UN Resolution 194," declares the introduction to a proposed constitution that Adalah authored. And this proposal would also abolish the Law of Return for Jews.

The NIF also finances Jewish-led groups that seek to undermine Israel's Jewish identity, such as the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

"The proposal to define Israel as a Jewish state," ACRI declared (in response to a draft constitution prepared by the Israel Democracy Institute, not, heaven forbid, the one presented by the Institute for Zionist Strategies), "is problematic both in principle and in practice."

Mada al Carmel, another group funded by the NIF, authored the "Haifa Declaration." Here are a few gems from that document: "Towards the end of the 19th century, the Zionist movement initiated its colonial-settler project in Palestine. Subsequently, in concert with world imperialism ... it succeeded in carrying out its project, which aimed at occupying our homeland ... The Zionist movement committed massacres against our people ... the State of Israel enacted racist land, immigration, and citizenship laws [a reference to the Law of Return] ... Israel carried out policies of subjugation and oppression in excess of those of the apartheid regime in South Africa."

The document subsequently demands the repeal of the Law of Return and of Israel's definition as a Jewish state.

The Haifa Declaration, and other similar "vision documents," were signed by prominent members of Israel's Arab community, including the leaders of dozens of other organizations that are also funded by the NIF.

Similar statements, for instance, appear in the "Future Vision" produced by the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee, another NIF grantee.

Thus in funding organizations that work to deepen the rift between Jews and Arabs in Israel, the NIF has racked up noteworthy successes. Astonishingly, however, these successes are not proudly displayed to the fund's philanthropists.

These donors, most of them Jews who support Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, are asked to contribute to the fund's praiseworthy - but as it turns out, not primary - activities: improving welfare, education and human rights in Israel.

Many NIF donors do not know that their money is being used to fund dozens of organizations committed to inflaming the Arab street, intensifying its nationalist tendencies and deepening the rift between Jews and Arabs.

These philanthropists would almost certainly object to their money being used to undermine Israel's Jewish identity and to lay a theoretical, legal and political framework for establishing another Arab state, on top of the proposed Palestinian state, in place of the State of Israel.

Obama, Israel and Iran

There’s something interesting that I heard on the radio. The Washington Times’ Jeff Kuhner spoke on a talk radio show. First of all he said that Hezbollah cells have infiltrated America’s borders and are prepared to attack. He also said that his sources have informed him that Israel has told Obama either he does something drastic about Iran or they will launch a massive attack on Iran in the spring. He says while the Arab countries would publicly condemn Israel, privately they would applaud it. Then he went on to say that there will be a regional shooting war to which Obama, as leader of the free world would be forced to step in and would thus reveal his weakness. Kuhner then said that the Jewish people face another holocaust unless Israel acts against Iran in the next five or six months. And finally he said American Jews should be ashamed of themselves for voting for Obama.