Wednesday, August 28, 2013

NYPD Under Scrutiny For Doing Its Job

Mosques are breeding grounds for terrorists, and it is absolutely legitimate to place them under surveillance along with those who attend.

The NYPD conducted legitimate counterterror investigations. Unfortunately now that this has gone public, it will be put to an end and we will all be in greater danger thanks to the media abetting jihad by spitefully outing the NYPD's counterterror program. The bastards don't care about the danger they are putting us in.

NYPD Designates Mosques as Terrorism Organizations Associated Press, Aug. 28, 2013
(NEW YORK) — The New York Police Department has secretly labeled entire mosques as terrorism organizations, a designation that allows police to use informants to record sermons and spy on imams, often without specific evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
Designating an entire mosque as a terrorism enterprise means that anyone who attends prayer services there is a potential subject of an investigation and fair game for surveillance.
Since the 9/11 attacks, the NYPD has opened at least a dozen “terrorism enterprise investigations” into mosques, according to interviews and confidential police documents. The TEI, as it is known, is a police tool intended to help investigate terrorist cells and the like.
Many TEIs stretch for years, allowing surveillance to continue even though the NYPD has never criminally charged a mosque or Islamic organization with operating as a terrorism enterprise.
The documents show in detail how, in its hunt for terrorists, the NYPD investigated countless innocent New York Muslims and put information about them in secret police files. As a tactic, opening an enterprise investigation on a mosque is so potentially invasive that while the NYPD conducted at least a dozen, the FBI never did one, according to interviews with federal law enforcement officials.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Obama Doing the Bidding of Jihadists in Syria

The British PM Cameron is pushing this. What I want to know is how does Obama justify striking Syria when he refuses to strike Iran's nuclear facilities or allow Israel to do so because of the likelihood of retaliatory action causing a regional conflagration? Well the same threats are being made if we strike Syria.  At least the risk of striking Iran would be justified in order to prevent it
from acquiring nuclear weapons. In the case of Syria, the risks outweigh the benefits. Obama has no idea what he is doing. Or more frighteningly, he knows exactly what he is doing by doing the bidding of the jihadists in Syria.

UN Diplomat: Jihadists May Have Used Gas -- Not Assad

The West is being manipulated. Why would Assad use chemical weapons when he is winning? Why incur the wrath of the Western powers when he has the upper hand? Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood are playing the West like a fiddle.
Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Nerve Gas, Not Assad's Regime: U.N. Official By Shaun Waterman, Washington Times Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.
Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were "strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof," that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.
But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed.
Read the rest

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Double Standard on Religious Rights

I want to know if muslims are going to be required to compromise their "faith" to accommodate others.

Absurd! Why not just hire a photographer who would be willing to shoot a gay
wedding? But that would have been the rational, reasonable response. Better to
make trouble for the Christian photographer. And instead of throwing this
frivolous case out, the stupid judge rules in the gay couple's favor. It is
abundantly clear that the gay community, or at least the radical members of it,
are all about imposing their agenda on America. They don't merely want to be
left alone to live their lives without being persecuted for who they are, as
they claim. They want to force society to embrace their lifestyle. Doesn't this
decision violate the photographer's religious rights? Do you think the judge
would have made this decision had the photographer been a muslim?


“Christians Must Compromise Faith To Accommodate Others” Says NM Supreme Court In 2006 a pair of lesbians wanted Elane Photography to do the photos of their commitment ceremony.  At the time, same-sex marriage and civil unions were not legally recognized.  The owners of Elane Photography, Elaine Huguenin turned down the request because of her strong Christian faith.  In typical gay privileged mentality, Vanessa Wilcox, one of the lesbians, filed a complaint the New Mexico Human Rights Commission claiming that she had been discriminated because of her sexual orientation. In 2008, the New Mexico Human Rights Commission ruled in Wilcox favor and ordered Huguenin to pay Wilcox $6,639.94 in legal fees.  The Christian photography appealed and the case was heard the same year and the court upheld the commission’s ruling. In 2009, with the aid of the Alliance Defending Freedom, the case was appealed to the New Mexico Court of Appeals.  The appeals court also upheld the commission’s ruling against the photographer saying:
Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/12263/christians-must-compromise-faith-accommodate-others-says-nm-supreme-court/#xUYbPp1bSF9shZWO.99

Saturday, August 24, 2013

The Swedes Are Insane

Morons! How about standing in solidarity with women and non-muslims suffering under the horrors of sharia law? Another example of the Swedes lack of moral clarity and downright insanity.

Feminist ‘Hijab Solidarity’?


hijabinstagram2Europe is awash in dhimmitude, but Sweden is a case unto itself. There’s something desperate and demented about the levels of dhimmitude on display in Ikea-land. In no other European country, moreover, is there so little pushback in the media.
As I wrote just yesterday, Sweden has the highest percentage of rapes in the Western world. And the problem is getting steadily worse. Given the progressive Swedish establishment’s fondness for earnest rhetoric about women’s rights, you might think this rape crisis would be a subject of deep concern in the nation’s media. But no – it’s a non-topic. It’s unmentionable. And for one reason: because everyone understands that the ever-increasing incidence of Swedish rapes is directly related to the ever-increasing number of Swedish Muslims. And in Sweden, you can’t talk critically about Islam. You just can’t – not publicly, anyway. When the subject is Islam, nothing is permitted other than the usual mindless multicultural mantras.

I’m deeply aware of all this. Even so, I was taken aback by one of the big news stories out of Sweden this week.
It started when a pregnant Muslim woman (one report put her age at 20; another identified her as a mother of three) claimed that she’d been attacked late Friday night. She was alone in a parking structure in the Stockholm suburb of Farsta, she said, when a man walked over to her, ripped off her hijab, and banged her head into a parked car, making her dizzy. He also growled something to the effect that people like her “don’t belong here.”
Now, if this actually happened, it’s repugnant. But there’s no evidence that it did happen – no eyewitnesses, no surveillance video – and it’s been suggested (although not, of course, in the Swedish media) that the woman’s story could be entirely bogus. In any case, it’s a man-bites-dog tale if there ever was one: Sweden is overrun with Muslim men who rape infidel women, not with infidels who pull headscarves off Muslim women.
Yet when the woman went public with her account, Swedish derangement syndrome kicked in – big time. On Sunday, Aftonbladet ran an op-ed signed by five persons: Bilan Osman, identified as an “anti-racist commentator”; Fatima Doubakil of the Muslim Human Rights Committee; Foujan Rouzbeh,  an “asylum rights activist”; Nabila Abdul Fattah, “commentator”; and Nachla Libre, “poet.”
The five authors asserted that “the woman in Farsta isn’t the only one who has been attacked in this way.” Many Muslim women, they maintained, have been subjected to similar mistreatment by “white Swedish men…on buses, in stores, and at restaurants.” The authors painted a picture of a country filled with white people who “harass, degrade, intimidate, and abuse others in public places because of their religious attire.” And they argued that such offenses have become increasingly common because – and, yes, they actually wrote the following – “Islam and Muslims are described in the media and by political parties as a problem and a threat to Swedish democracy.”
Yes, Islam is a threat to Swedish democracy; but no, the Swedish media virtually never dare to admit this fact, or to say anything that might remotely hint at it. And the only political party that addresses this issue is the Swedish Democratic Party, whose members are not only routinely condemned in the media, in the harshest of terms, but have been repeatedly harassed, degraded, intimidated, and abused by the Swedish government itself.
The op-ed authors went on to demand – and that’s the word they used, “demand” – that Justice Minister Beatrice Ask “appoint a commission to investigate, map, and come up with specific action plans to combat the widespread hate crimes against Muslims.” They called on the government “to stop the march of fascism” (as represented, apparently, by that lone man in the parking structure who allegedly pulled off the woman’s headscarf). And they proclaimed what they called a “hijabupprop” – a hijab action. “We encourage all of our sisters in Sweden – religious and non-religious – to veil themselves on the morning of August 19 to show solidarity with all Muslim women who, all too often, suffer harassment and violence.”
The five authors tweeted their call to action on Twitter. The tweet was shared over 65,000 times. The idea was brilliant, providing politically correct Swedes with an excellent opportunity to posture. And it proved a magnificent success. In “solidarity” with the purported victim, countless Swedish women – including a number of well-known actors, writers, journalists, artists, and politicians – wore headscarves on Monday. And took pictures of themselves doing so. Their photos flooded Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.

One of the women who proudly donned traditional Muslim headgear was Gudrun Schyman of the Feminist Initiative, a leading women’s rights group. Another was Social Democratic politician Veronica Palm, who announced on Facebook that she supported the hijab action “because nobody should feel threatened or harassed because of the way they choose to dress.” Sweden’s Humanist organization issued a statement in support of the campaign, declaring that all men and women have a right to dress as they wish.
How about the right NOT to wear a hijab? How about the women who suffer harassment and violence at the hands of muslim men because they are NOT covered?
Justice Minister Beatrice Ask, for her part, invited the hijab campaign’s organizers to meet with her on Tuesday. “I would love to hear what they have to say,” she told the media, “because I believe they have more to say than what they can write in an op-ed.” She underscored that the hijab-yanking incident “should be taken very seriously,” as should the views of the campaign organizers. As for the organizers, while they agreed to meet Ask, they didn’t hide the fact that they were sore at her for turning down a joint TV interview with them. “We’ll meet her, of course, but we won’t be satisfied with that,” one of them griped. “We want her to take action.”
The Swedish news media, notorious for the decorous silence they have long maintained about the country’s rape crisis, were all over this story. The newspapers were awash in stories about the hijab campaign and full of pictures of the famous Swedish women in Muslim headscarves. The hijab campaigners were interviewed repeatedly on TV and radio. One of them, Nabila Abdul Fattah, admitted that their goal was “to normalize the hijab.”
There were very few dissenting voices –  at least not in the public square. Muslim feminist Hanna Gadban was furious about the campaign, and tried to remind everyone that the hijab is a symbol of patriarchal oppression. But she was a voice crying in the wilderness. Like a chilled bottle of Dom Perignon to a dipsomaniac, the hijab action was just too irresistible to the Swedish mind.
Sitting at my computer and looking over all the pictures of Swedish women in headscarves, I pondered, more bemused than ever, the eternal question: what is it in the Swedish character that makes such foolishness possible? The zillions of photos of stupid, self-satisfied infidel women in veils symbolizing female subordination were ridiculous, deserving of mockery, of derisive laughter. But they were also scary. Seeing brainwashed people is always scary. “What’s wrong with these people?” I said aloud as I pored over the screwy selfies. “Whatever it is,” my partner said, “it should be in the DSM.”
Even as all this nonsense was underway, Sweden, which has the world’s second highest rape statistics – thanks to nothing more or less than the army of savage Muslim men within its borders who have no respect or mercy whatsoever for unveiled infidel women – was inexorably moving up toward the title of world’s #1 rape nation. And there was no sign of anyone doing anything whatsoever about it.

Jewish Life in Sweden

It is far too much to expect the Swedes and Europeans in general to be anything
other than the spineless, cowardly, morally depraved, Jew-haters they have
always been. What would be shocking is if they expressed a modicum of courage
and moral clarity.

"But even this failed to appease our tormentor, who spent the rest of the trip repeatedly kicking the back of my son’s seat. At one point I glanced around our compartment: there were four other people there, four adults witnessing a single mother and her five-year-old child being attacked by a grown man. They did nothing. I tried forcing them to meet my gaze; but they just turned away, put on their headphones, stared at their screens, ignored what was happening in front of them".

A Jew's Life in Sweden

Europe doing what it does best. For the life of me, I do not understand why Jews do not flee these savages.
"How to Survive as a Jew in Sweden" (Mosaic). Thanks to Elder of Ziyon (hat tip Inexion)
From Mosaic Magazine, an excerpt from a letter to a writer who discussed Jewish life in Europe today:
On April 26 of this year, I was on a train with my five-year-old son Charlie. We were on our way to spend shabbat with friends in the city. You see, our town, significant in the history of Swedish Jewry, shut its synagogue in the late 90s. All that remains now is a plaque stating that there was once Jewish life here, while we are left with an hour-long train ride every weekend to attend services.

My son was wearing his kippah as we got on the train. He loves his kippah. He is not yet old enough to know the dangers entailed in wearing it, for this is a fact from which I have tried to protect him. But April 26 would change all that.

There was a gentleman sitting in our reserved seat. An Arab, maybe fifty years old, listening to music. Apologizing for the inconvenience, I asked him politely for our seat. He got up, inspected my son, and then leaned over me, saying: You people always take what you want. You need to learn.

He then walked straight into my son, causing him to fall over, and took the seat behind us.

We sat. Hiding my trembling hands from my son’s sight, I picked up Shabbes for Kids and started to review the week’s Torah portion with him. We hadn’t progressed as far as a page before the man stood up and screamed: Quiet! I don’t want to hear that! You take what you want and never think of others! Shut up! 
Read the rest
 

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Obama Sides with Jihadists, Suspends Aid to Egypt

Obama never threatened to withhold aid to Egypt when the mb was in power. He sold them F-16's. Now that the jihad terror group has been rightfully ousted from power, Obama cuts off aid. Obama has clearly revealed himself to be on the side of the jihadists at every turn. Through his henchman lurch Kerry, he has also threatened Israel with a delegitimization campaign on "steroids" if it refused demands to surrender its territory to the genocidal PA. No delegitimization campaign against the savage jihadists of the mb and PA however. This man has consistently taken the side of evil.

Report: US secretly suspends military aid to Egypt

Daily Beast reports that Obama administration has decided privately to act like the July ouster of then-Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi by his country's military was a coup • Publicly, U.S. government is maintaining that military aid is not on hold. 
Read the rest

Monday, August 19, 2013

NY Slimes Blames Israel For Unrest in Egypt

Leave it to the sick bastards at the NY slimes to support the muslim brotherhood and blame Israel for Egyptian unrest.

NY TIMES BLAMES ISRAEL AND AIPAC FOR PROLONGING EGYPT’S AGONY

And if the allegation is true that Israel is standing by Sisi, what’s wrong with that? What happens in Egypt is of immediate concern to Israel and it is only natural that she calls them the way she sees them. The US and the EU are wrong on the peace process and wrong in their embrace of the MB. Why should we support wrong policies? Ted Belman
From: Leo Rennert, AMERICAN THINKER
It’s the lead story on the Sunday front page of the New York Times—a lengthy piece on how frantic, behind-the-scenes efforts by U.S. and European diplomats supposedly came close to building a path toward ending the bloody conflict in Egypt between the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and the military-backed interim government.
In the end, as we all know, external prodding failed. But in allotting blame for why diplomacy didn’t succeed, the Times gratuitously points an accusing finger at Israel and AIPAC, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, for allegedly siding with the Egyptian military and undermining U.S. diplomacy (“How a U.S. Push to Defuse Egypt Ended in Failure –Barrage of Diplomacy—Despite 17 Calls from Hagel, Cairo Chose Confrontation” by David Kirkpatrick, Peter Baker and Michael Gordon).

The article not only gets the most prominent spot up front, but continues inside the paper with a spread, including photos, that takes up an entire inside page.
Yet length doesn’t guarantee accurate reporting. In fact, the Times dispatch is built on a deeply flawed premise that outside pressures somehow might have been able to bring Egypt’s agony to an end, especially if President Obama had shown more backbone and cut off $1.3 billion in U.S. military aid to Cairo. The reality, ignored by the Times, is that Egyptians and only Egyptians can put an end to this bloody affair. Suspension of U.S. military aid would be more than offset by more generous military aid from Saudi Arabia and other wealthy Arab oil states.
But in pursuit of external meddlers aligned against Washington diplomacy, the Times prefers to build a case against Israel and AIPAC. Here’s how Kirkpatrick, Baker and Gordon put it:
“The Israelis, whose military had close ties to General Sisi from his former post as head of military intelligence, were supporting the (military) takeover as well. Western diplomats say that General Sisi and his circle appeared to be in heavy communication with Israeli colleagues, and the diplomats believed the Israelis were also undercutting the Western message by reassuring the Egyptians not to worry about American threats to cut off aid.
“Israeli officials deny having reassured Egypt about the aid, but acknowledge having lobbied Washington to protect it.
“When Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, proposed an amendment halting military aid to Egypt, the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee sent a letter to senators on July 31 opposing it, saying it ‘could increase instability in Egypt and undermine important U.S. interests and negatively impact our Israel ally.’ Statements from influential lawmakers echoed the letter, and the Senate defeated the measure, 86 to 13, later that day.”
There’s more here than a whiff of Jewish conspiracy theories that fueled medieval anti-Semitism.. Notice that AIPAC is tagged as an ”influential” pressure group presumably capable of swaying the U.S. Senate. AIPAC cracks the whip, purportedly, and 83 senators jump to Israel’s tune. It apparently doesn’t occur to the Times that 83 U.S. senators are capable of voting based on their own agendas and beliefs – without a need of “influential” external lobbying to make up their own minds.
As for Israel’s supposed role in taking sides against the Muslim Brotherhood, the authors of the article never bother to identify their sources. Never mind that Israeli officials from Prime Minister Netanyahu on down are on record as having decided that Israel will avoid involvement in Egypt’s conflict. So why rely on dubious, unattributed sources like “the Israelis” and “Western diplomats ” and “the diplomats believed,” and General Sisi “appeared to be” etc.? Could it be that on-the-record pronouncements would have spoiled the conspiratorial atmospherics favored by the Times’ reporters?
And not given the Times a pretext to build a breach between Israel and the United States?
LEO RENNERT

Outrage: Million muslim March on 9/11

Can you believe the chutpah of them to march on 9/11. As if it were muslims who were the real victims of 9/11.  That is the twisted narrative they are trying to convey. .

Muslims plan million-man march in DC on 9/11
American Muslim Political Action Committee's decision to hold mass protest rally on 12th anniversary of deadliest terror attack in American history causes media firestorm • Group claims Muslim-Americans are "victimized by being made the villains."
Read the rest 

Western Governments, Media Side with the muslim Brotherhood

Egypt’s Coptic Church announces support for army, police as Muslim Brotherhood attacks more churches today

And the Muslim Brotherhood continues its war on the Christians.
Maspero Youth Union confirms the Saint-Georges church in #Egypt's Helwan was burnt today - Ahmad Talaat on Twitter. (thanks to Holly)
Egypt’s Coptic Church announces support for army, police Al Arabiya, August 17, 2013
Egypt’s Orthodox Coptic Church announced on Friday its support for the military and security forces in their fight against what it called “groups of armed violence.”
“The Egyptian Coptic Church is following the unfortunate developments on the ground of our country Egypt and emphasizes its strong stance with the Egyptian police, armed forces and other organizations of the Egyptian people in the face of groups of armed violence and black terrorism,” the church said in a statement.
“While we appreciate the sincere and friendly position that understands the nature of the developments, we strongly deplore the media fallacies that are prevalent in Western countries,” the statement added.
The Coptic Church called on the West to “read objectively the facts of events, and not give international and political cover to these terrorist and bloody groups.”
 Good luck with that. Just try getting the truth from the western media. At every turn, they support the jihadists narrative. Israel has been dealing with this skewed reporting for years, where victim and aggressor are inverted.
Read the rest

Saturday, August 17, 2013

Obama Continues Backing the muslim Brotherhood

We should be supporting the Egyptian military's efforts to suppress the muslim brotherhood. Instead, the Obama administration, Europe and the western media are on the side of the brotherhood.
They always come down on the side of the jihadists.

When the muslim brotherhood was in power, Obama sent them F16's, since they have been ousted, now Obama threatens to cut of military aid.  He is consistently on the wrong side, on the side of the bloodthirsty muslim brotherhood jihadists.

Greenfield: CRUSH THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD 

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Lurch Kerry is a Joke

Israel is being pressured to give land away while there is a civil war raging in
neighboring Syria and turmoil in neighboring Egypt and that country possibly on
the verge of civil war. These people can't even live in peace with their own,
but Israel is expected to make peace with arab muslims. What a joke.

Egypt Bloodbath: VP Resigns, Muslim Brotherhood opens fire on security forces, Christians targeted, hundreds dead, thousands wounded

Rabaa injured brought on trucks
Injured brought in on trucks
Churches belonging to Egypt's minority Coptic Christians were torched in three southern provinces — Minya, Assiut and Sohag. Muslim Brotherhood supporters opened fire on Security forces, with Brotherhood mobs chanting "with our blood, our souls we will defend Islam" as we speak.
According to Egypt Independent: "The scene in the hospital is of a war zone: blood is everywhere, with patients lying on the floor screaming for help as corpses are being piled up in a corner of the room." Read the rest

Kerry Threatens Israel

Either surrender territory to its sworn genocidal enemy or face isolation. In other words, commit suicide or we will facilitate your destruction. Some choice. No such threats are made to the PA regardless of the hatred, incitement and terrorism they perpetrate. They continue to be funded. No such threats of sanctions against these horrific islamic regimes that perpetrate massacres. If the talks don't bear fruit, it will be because of the "palestinians" as it always is. But no such threats are ever issued against the "palestinians". And let's hope nothing does come of the talks. This administration is truly evil.  I have even greater contempt for Bibi who has no balls.

Israel is not a military or economic super power, but Israel is a technological superpower. And of course Israel is a regional economic and military power. That has to count for something. None of the arab and muslim countries are superpowers either, but the west caters to them. Call the EU and obama administration’s bluff. They will be harmed without the technological, scientific and medical advancements of Israel. There’s a reason they have economic interests with Israel in the first place.




Israel Faces Deepening Isolation, Kerry Warns



[Last Sunday I made a detailed case for the threat of isolation in my article. Obama to impose a solution if necessary Ted Belman]
Secretary of State John Kerry
By Jeffrey Goldberg Aug 13, 2013 12:10 AM
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s peace mission to the Middle East is semi-quixotic, if not wholly quixotic. I doubt he’ll reach his goal of negotiating a final-status agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis. The two sides haven’t even agreed yet to the topics they’ll discuss in negotiations.
But we should give Kerry this: He has managed to at least partially capture the attention of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. I say partially because the Netanyahu government’s self-destructive West Bank settlement program continues apace (though the latest round of construction is scheduled to take place on territory that would almost certainly be granted to Israel in final-status talks).

There are some early signs that Netanyahu is realizing the price his country may one day pay for its settlements, in particular those near Palestinian population centers. He met recently with some of Israel’s leading manufacturers, who expressed their worry that their products may one day be boycotted in Europe, a worry he shares. Kerry, capitalizing on this anxiety, has warned Netanyahu in recent weeks that if the current peace talks bear no fruit, Israel may soon be facing an international delegitimization campaign — in his words — “on steroids.”
According to officials I have spoken to, who requested anonymity so they could speak freely, Kerry thinks the one thing Netanyahu fears as much as Iran’s nuclear program is the growing power of the international movement that seeks to isolate, scapegoat and demonize his country. (One caveat: Kerry, like most Americans who know Netanyahu, understands that the prime minister’s narrowest but most potent fear is of being unseated.)
Although Netanyahu is worried that the campaign to make Israel appear to be an illegitimate state could hurt the country’s robust economy, he is said to be even more worried that this campaign will erode Israel’s ability to defend itself. The theory is simple: A country seen as illegitimate, not only by the powerful Arab lobby at the United Nations but also by Western powers, will have little standing if it is forced to retaliate against sustained attacks from groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which remain committed to Israel’s extermination. Netanyahu thinks that the campaign to delegitimize Israel could force Western powers to rein in Israel, or at the very least, rush to condemn it before it has the chance to defend itself.
Netanyahu’s two fears are related. Israel will find it increasingly difficult to one day act against the Iranian nuclear program if it is hobbled by the hostility of the international community. For years, I’ve been arguing that Israel would find more sympathy in its campaign against Iranian nukes if it was more willing to compromise with the Palestinians. Netanyahu, unlike other prominent figures on the Israeli right, has agreed in principle to a two-state solution, but he hasn’t done very much to bring it about — he has only grudgingly and temporarily suspended expansions of the settlements located on land that would almost surely be part of the future state of Palestine.
But Netanyahu has lately been leaning in the direction of the Israeli political center. And by doing this he is making the truculent base of his party, the Likud, quite nervous. Netanyahu, I’m told, has taken to disparaging some of the politicians to his right as “insane.” These are the politicians who delude themselves into thinking that their country is a superpower, and can behave as one.
So, when the European Union recently issued guidelines that will restrict its members from (among other things) funding research conducted on the far side of Israel’s 1967 borders, these politicians decided, in their wisdom, that Israel should engage in a partial boycott of the EU. They’re demanding that Israel withdraw from a lucrative EU-sponsored research-funding program to protest the settlement exclusion guidelines. Netanyahu also finds the new EU guidelines reprehensible (and they are, in fact, highly problematic, potentially placing settlers in the far-flung Jewish colonies of the West Bank in the same category as Jewish residents of the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City). But he understands that he can’t win a fight with the entire EU if it decides to enact a partial boycott of his country. On the one hand, EU hostility toward Israel isn’t particularly helpful to Kerry or his chief negotiator, Martin Indyk. Threats directed at Israel from Europe, the continent whose cruelty and hatred helped create a need for a Jewish national refuge in the first place, may, in the short term, bolster Israel’s far-right, which could handcuff Netanyahu in negotiations.
On the other hand, the majority of Israelis are sensible, and they know, as Netanyahu knows, that Israel can’t exist in an entirely friendless world. Partly because of the actions of the EU, Netanyahu is listening to Kerry’s warnings with newly open ears.

Monday, August 12, 2013

More Betrayal by Self-Appointed American Jewish "Leaders"

I did not have a vote in appointing these individuals to be Jewish "leaders". They certainly don't represent my point of view and I think its revolting that they would use their Judaism to provide cover for lurch Kerry to pressure Israel into carrying out dangerous policies, including the release of mass murderers. 

"Despicable and Dangerous"
Arlene Kushner

Last Thursday night, Secretary of State Kerry met for 90 minutes with
a select group of heads of Jewish American organizations to speak
about the "peace process."  Standing with him at this "briefing" were
National Security Advisor Susan Rice and special envoy (Middle East
"mediator?") Martin Indyk.

Present were representatives of AIPAC, J Street, the ADL, the American
Jewish Committee, the Conservative movement (the Rabbinic Assembly
according to the JPost, and perhaps also the United Synagogue), the
Orthodox Union, American Friends of Lubavitch, B’nai B’rith
International, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the Jewish
Federations of North America, Hadassah, the National Jewish Democratic
Council, the National Council of Jewish Women and the Conference of
Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

As the meeting was off the record, there was no official report
issued; media descriptions relied upon reports from participants.  All
reports I encountered had the same basic information, but with varying
details provided from one to the other. What I'm reading is that Kerry
said there was a "strategic imperative" to arrive at a deal soon.
Sounding "upbeat" about the possibilities, he said he "feared" for
Israel's future if no deal was reached.

Kerry asked for American Jewish organizational "support" for this
diplomatic effort.  He is worried about "pressures" on Netanyahu that
might sway him away from a deal -- as he has to contend with right
wing parties in his coalition.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/kerry-indyk-meet-with-us-jewish-leaders-at-white-house/

http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Kerry-to-Jewish-leaders-Peace-is-strategic-imperative-322558

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.540618
Continue reading

Thursday, August 8, 2013

UN Sanctions islamic Jew-Hatred

The UN sanctions muslim calls for Jewish genocide. But any slight offense to muslims UN officials are quick to condemn.

 http://www.unwatch.org/cms.asp?id=4424640&campaign_id=63111
UN Condemns Hate by Marginal Individuals,
But Ignores Hate by Government Leaders
UN Watch urges Ban Ki-moon to condemn Iran's incitement to destroy Israel
Above: New Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, repatedly described by Euronews this week as "moderate," at a rather immoderate rally in Tehran, August 2, 2013.
GENEVA, August 5 - UN Watch is urging UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and human rights chief Navi Pillay to condemn the latest call to eliminate Israel by the leaders of Iran and Hezbollah, who invoked God and religion in their sermons of hate.
Friday's "Al Quds Day," an anti-Israel festival bequeathed to the world by Ayatollah Khomeini, saw Iran's outgoing and incoming presidents incite frenzied masses with descriptions of the Jewish state as "a sore" that has "afflicted the body of the Islamic world for many years," saying a storm would "uproot" Israel, which "has no place in this region." Iranian proxy Hassan Nasrallah, head of Hezbollah, called Israel a "cancerous gland" to be "excised." The West, especially the U.S. and Britain, were also targets of demonization. 
While UN Watch's appeal for United Nations action became the focus of discussion at a media briefing by Ban Ki-moon's spokesman, the world body has yet to speak out.
By contrast, one cannot help but notice how when a marginal and unheard-of pastor in America incited to hatred of Islam, Ban Ki-moon swiftly condemned him, as did various and sundry other UN officials. American generals and ambassadors issued repeated denunciations. The world was in an uproar.
Similarly, when an even more marginal figure -- an anonymous individual -- published a YouTube video mocking Islam, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay sprung into action.
She issued a stand-alone press statement calling the film "malicious," "deliberately provocative," and a "disgracefully distorted" image of Muslims.
"I fully understand why people wish to protest strongly against it," said Pillay, who also cautioned against violent reactions.
She recalled "another deeply provocative act by a pastor in Florida," condemning "obnoxious acts of this type."

Yet when religiously-tinged incitement to hatred on a mass scale is committed by the leaders of Iran and Hezbollah -- a coalition member of the Lebanese government, whose "political wing" is an approved EU interlocutor -- why is Ms. Pillay suddenly unwilling to offer so much as a press quote?
When "moderate" Iranian President Hassan Rouhani declares that Israel is "a sore" afflicting the Muslim body, why is Pillay unable to find this, at the every least, malicious, provocative, disgraceful, distorted, or obnoxious? Why is the world's top anti-racist indifferent? And what of the UN's top official, Ban Ki-moon?
 __________
TEXT OF UN WATCH LETTER TO BAN KI-MOON
His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-moon
The Secretary-General
The United Nations
New York, NY 10017

August 5, 2013
Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

United Nations Watch expresses its outrage at the latest incitement to hatred by the leaders of Iran. We urge you, together with High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, to condemn these gross violations of the United Nations Charter and of core UN declarations against racism and intolerance.

We call your attention to the following incidents from Friday, 2 August, in connection with "Al Quds Day," a festival of hate created by the late Ayatollah Khomeini:
   •   The Islamic Republic of Iran organized mass rallies and religious sermons that spewed vitriolic hatred, with state television showing hundreds of thousands marching across the country to chants of "Death to Israel" and "Death to America." (Al Jazeera, 2 August 2013)
   •   Outgoing president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—invoking "God as my witness"—told a mass crowd that a storm would "uproot" Israel, and that the Jewish state "has no place in this region." (Agence France Presse, August 3)
    •   Then President-elect Hassan Rouhani described Israel as "a sore" that "has afflicted the body of the Islamic world for many years." (BBC, 5 August 2013)
   •   In Beirut, Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Iranian proxy Hezbollah—which is part of the Lebanese government—called Israel a "cancerous gland" that needed to be "excised." He was greeted with ecstatic cheers from the audience. (Lebanon Daily Star, 2 August 2013)
These are not statements by marginal and unknown figures, but televised speeches by senior figures inciting to religious hatredand specifically to the elimination of a United Nations member state, an illegal threat under international law.
As you know, the UN Charter obliges all member states to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.
We urge you to speak out.

Sincerely,
Hillel Neuer
Executive Director
 

Jihad Acid Attack Against British Charity Workers in Zanzibar

Why do naive westerners insist upon going to muslim countries to help those who hate them? And why would parents allow their teenage daughters to go to these places, they must be out of their minds. How could you possibly be unaware of the extreme dangers? This is a savage culture. I would bet these girls are the product of liberal parents who taught them they should help the less fortunate and thought it was a wonderful idea to go to Zanzibar to help the poor.  I would bet they were also taught to believe that islam is peaceful and most muslims are peaceful and to believe otherwise is bigoted and racist.

Zanzibar: Two British Charity Workers Have Acid Thrown Into Their Faces

UPDATE: Zanzibar acid attack victim Katie Gee 'assaulted in street by Muslim woman for singing during Ramadan' weeks earlier