$150,000 Settlement for Black Public School Students Harassed by Other Black Students for “Acting White”

Labels: »
some black kids sued other black kids for racially bullying them for acting white. the court decided that the claim was valid because of the crime... and the identity didn't matter... therefor an honor killing is wrong because of violence towards a Muslim and not because of the identity of the culprit being Muslim. interesting note when prosecuting Muslims for acting out their religion. legally their status as Muslims is irrelevant.

That’s the report from South Carolina Lawyers Weekly:

The two students each received $50,000, and two family members who filed the suits on their behalf received $25,000 apiece ....
Title VI prohibits allowing a racially hostile educational environment in schools and programs receiving federal financial assistance and provides for a private cause of action for violations....
Both students were African-American, and so was most of the elementary school’s student body, according to [the students’ lawyer, Lawrence C.] Kobrovsky....
[The younger student] claimed she suffered emotional trauma because she was subjected to racial and sexual slurs at ... elementary school ... Despite complaints, school administrative staff and district officials allowed the abuse to “escalate to the point where [she] was physically threatened, assaulted and battered,” the suit alleged.
“You have a culture where to act like you want to do well in school is considered acting white. And that is part of why we’re saying that it was racial, even though the students were all of the same race because they weren’t acting how the others thought they should be acting as members of that race,” Kobrovsky said....

Hans says:

Under this reasoning, all honor killings are religion-based crimes, because the victims are killed for not acting Muslim enough.
Of course, whether that is so or not, honor killings target girls, not boys, which is all that the new federal hate crimes law requires (it does not require hate as a motive, only that the perpetrator act partly or wholly based on the victim’s sex, religion, race, sexual orientation, or transgender status). They are clearly sex-based hate crimes, more obviously so than many rapes.
Yet no honor killings are being prosecuted by the Justice Department as hate crimes, despite falling within its literal language — even as white defendants acquitted of hate crimes against illegal aliens get reprosecuted in federal court after being found not guilty in state court, suggesting they might actually be innocent of the crime.
By the way, the Eighth Circuit found an employer liable for allowing one African-American to racially harass another.

Gay Kosher Taharat hamishpachah

Labels: » » »
orthodox Jews don't have sex during menstruation, so gay Jews are looking to parallel the practice?

the time gay men don't have sex is usually a little after a meal... from what I garner. Gross; bizarre thinking.
how is the observant gay man to unlock the power of kosher Jewish sexuality, as traditionally understood? Beginning from the premise that if there is a wisdom in taharat hamishpachah for any Jew, there is a wisdom there for every Jew, the basic idea is that gay men would need to impose upon themselves a regular practice of abstinence within relationship, for a meaningful period of time. One approach to this might be lunar and calendrical. While a woman’s body clock is “internal,” men could select twelve fixed days of every (Jewish) month for sexual abstinence - via jewishmosaic.org

they do make some interesting arguments in legitimizing certain forms of gay male relationships by exploring the history of the wording: a distinction between the words 'abhorrence' and 'abomination', claiming the King James Bible of 1611 described male homosexuality with the latter term.

"The first published use of the word “abominable” occurred in 1366 in precisely this context, referring to “The abhomynable Synne of Sodomye.” “Abomination” first appears in 1395, in a use by John Purvey, an anti-Catholic follower of John Wycliffe, in the statement, “All reasonable men have greet [great] abhominacioun of bodily sodomie.” The Middle English spellings show the word’s origins in the Latin ab homine, “away from man,” with an implication of “inhuman,” or “beastly.”

What might be thought “inhuman” or “beastly” about male-to-male sexual conduct (which after all is not especially common in the animal kingdom)? Appetites for rest, for food, and for sex are part of the animal element of human nature. Animals do not know the difference between Shabbat and the weekdays; they do not know the difference between kosher and non-kosher food; and they do not regulate their sexual contact intentionally. They behave, instead, “instinctively.” Halakhic human beings, however, observe (in both senses) these differences, and can reflect them in distinctively Jewish practices of separation. "

what makes the argument in this post most peculiar is the assumption that sex should not be carnal and involved completely in consumption or pleasure and that ritual somehow contains the sin of sex being a service. But what contradicts the argument is the writer then claims that the very same ritual preserves the spontaneity of sex and therefor she argues in both directions. What is it? should sex be a service that is tangible or not? I'm not condemning functionless sex, but I certainly don't see any consistency in the argument here.

the torah certainly seems to condemn masturbation and I'm not sure there is any distinction between the abuse of one sexual activity and another. the context of masturbation being a sin is certainly a lot more clear then the context of gay interactions. I certainly am not going to say that I believe that most humans can function without some kind of sexual stimulation, and I don't think it is healthy either, though there are some that seem to be happy without it. I am certain that most people would not be functioning people without sexual activity. We can not assume that all people will get married either. So as much as I relent that prohibited sexual activity in the torah is kosher as far as I'm concerned, I'm also very certain that to ritualize sexual activity doesn't make it any closer to something that would be endorsed by g-d. I'm also fairly certain that ritual is not bound by Judaism without a state religion that existed before the destruction of the temple.

I'd also like to point out that it is impossible... yes impossible to sleep with a man the same way one would with a woman. This is why I find it unnecessary to condemn Gay people in Judaism... and if it is truly impossible then why would we use the same rituals? The negative connotations from the Sodom story come from a context of prostitution and I see little in the old testament that is in conflict with a gay lifestyle.

...on the other hand. rituals and contracts should be different and reflective of our identity... but this is another issue I have dealt with concerning gay marriage... that I don't endorse. and I don't endorse it because it is reflective of this need to ritualize that which is not the same. it is pointless to compare two unalike concepts and brings no dignity to do so.

no Jewish American Literature

This is why Obama and his friends see the Holocaust as the reasoning behind the state of Israel and also the way to delegitimize it. We are now not only a people without a narrative beyond being the fuel for a flame of hatred. take away narrative and there is no longer history or a people. Narrative doesn't need to be perfect. It doesn't need to be truth, but there is certainly an obvious attempt to cleanse our story from the positive interactions within Western culture. If ten percent of the Roman empire was Jewish, for certain their identity goes beyond abuse?

Inside Higher Education has a very sober account of a panel at the annual Modern Language Association meeting on why English departments tend to ignore American Jewish literature, while spending significant resources on other ethnic literature. Despite its sobriety, the account left me alternatively laughing and shaking my head (and sometimes both: “Jewishness has been associated with Israel, white privilege, colonialism and racism”) at the banal idiocies of modern academia.

One serious point raised in the article is that Holocaust studies dominates the study of Jewish literature. I remember when I was a student at Brandeis, with what was then the top Jewish Studies department in the country, by far the most popular Jewish Studies course, and one of the most popular courses in the entire university, was a course on the history of the Holocaust. It says something disturbing and unhealthy about American Jewish life that for both Jews and non-Jews, a three thousand year old living tradition and culture is so reduced to the horrific events of the mid-twentieth century.

UPDATE: And here’s a cogent comment on the IHE piece from one “Michael Greenspan”:

What most strikes this non-academic is the reasoning with which some of those quoted argue for greater study of Jewish literature. Prof. Cutter points not to great Jewish writers but to Jewish traumas. Prof. Hoffman appears to accept the logic that a group’s “marginal status” decides whether that group’s literature is worthy of study. This attitude — that the greater the group’s perceived success, the less deserving of attention the art produced by members of that group — is remarkably small-minded. And if suffering supplies cachet, no wonder that “Holocaust literature . . . should be so much more present — in literature departments in the United States — than American Jewish fiction and culture.” How could it be otherwise?

Howard Dean, Obama Officials and Dems Support Global Socialism

Labels: » » » » » » » » »
Yikes! Democrats in league with Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero? "On January 1, 2010, Spain, which has one of the most anti-Israel governments in Europe, takes over the EU presidency. Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, an outspoken critic of Israel, has already promised to make the Palestinian issue a center-piece of Spain’s six-month presidency." - from Hudson NY:

Former Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean said on December 8 that "cooperation" between European socialists and the Democratic Party has "intensified significantly" over the last several years and involves "regular contact" at "Congress, Senate, party and foundation levels." He added that "efforts have been remarkable from both sides." . . . The conference was held in Madrid, Spain under the patronage of Spain's socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, whose pro-homosexual and pro-abortion policies have led to street protests by thousands of supporters of traditional values. Zapatero is also under fire for a jobless rate of nearly 18 percent. . . .
via arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com
funny the way Catholic countries are so in conflict with their own church. kind of like what is going on in Israel with some of those left wing Jews... I have a lot of empathy
Dean called for a "long-term global vision" for the transformation of the global economy and mentioned that disgraced Democratic President Bill Clinton had previously spoken at a meeting of the PES-sponsored Global Progressive Forum. The April 2-3 Global Progressive Forum also featured Robert Borosage of the left-wing group that calls itself the Campaign for America's Future.The Global Progressive Forum is also sponsored by the Socialist International, whose U.S. affiliate, the Democratic Socialists of America, includes long-time backers of Barack Obama.
"Free-market globalization alone cannot achieve social justice," Dean told the PES convention. "What the world needs is a global New Deal." He defined this as a "transition to a low-carbon economy" involving "a major transformation in the patterns of production and consumption." This will include "large-scale investments and mechanisms" to share the costs and the policies, he said. His remarks came on the eve of the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen. Dean never used the words "world government," but did declare that "We need a new institutional framework to govern, manage and monitor implementation."
via arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com
and wow was Copenhagen now a success now? do you really think China, Sudan and the Saudis are ready for socialist training wheels that would stunt their growth?

Everyone is vilifying China on sabotaging the global warming fraud. For what? For operating in their own self interest?
via atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com

In order to bring this about, the PES Congress issued a "Call to Action" urging the imposition of a "global financial transaction tax" that would generate hundreds of billions of dollars and "provide funding for long-term public investments, to finance global development and climate change." As AIM has disclosed, there is a secret plan by left-wing non-governmental organizations to bring about this global tax over the next several months. In another PES document, "A New Direction for Progressive Societies," the group urged a "progressive peace policy" that says "...we fully support the initiative of the US administration in favor of global disarmament" and urges the "deepening [of] transatlantic cooperation with the new US administration."
"It is our profound conviction that we must secure a Global New Deal for a new global order of social justice, equality, sustainable development and democracy," the document concludes. . . . The "Global New Deal" was also the theme of the October "Global Progress Conference" in Madrid, Spain, sponsored by the Center for American Progress, the IDEAS Foundation, and the Heinrich Boell Foundation, an affiliate of the German Green Party. A summary of remarks said that the conference was perceived to be the "starting point for a new global progressive alliance." The Center for American Progress is a George Soros-funded entity run by former Clinton official John Podesta, who co-chaired the Obama-Biden Transition Project.
Obama pollster Benenson has a website which says that he "was the lead pollster and a senior strategist for President Barack Obama during the 2008 election, and he continues in that role today." In addition to Obama and various Democratic Party candidates, elected officials, and campaign organizations, his clients have included the AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Brookings Institution, the Soros Foundation, and the Working Families Party, an ACORN front. The Benenson Strategy Group has represented several foreign governments and currently represents British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, a prominent advocate of a global tax who is facing re-election in June 2010. Brown's socialist Labor Party is a member of the PES.

NWO Anyone?

Ford Motor Company Kept Workers Who Praised 9/11 Employed for 3 Years


"...Ford simply didn’t care enough to fire them immediately and stick to its guns."

it is unbelievable that these guys were complaining about being fired for celebrating the death of thousands of Americans at an American company, what is more unbelievable is that they attempted to sue for discrimination.

why would a major American automotive manufacturer, keep in its employ four employees who cheered the wholesale murder of nearly 3,000 Americans? The United Automobile Workers or UAW pressured Ford to keep them. But, certainly, this behavior would have been cause for firing under the UAW collective bargaining agreement?


"Last week, Ford Motor Company finally won a suit by a former employee, Arab Muslim Saleem Shariff, who cheered the 9/11 attacks and high-fived fellow Arab Muslim employees on the day of the attacks. Three others–Khalid Ali Alward, Abdul Mohamed, and Saleh Mohamed Omar–also Arab Muslims, participated and did the same thing: they cheered and high-fived the 9/11 attacks. And they all sued when they were not hired for permanent employment, but only Shariff appealed after losing at the trial court level. The Michigan Court of Appeals, in an unpublished decision (which I obtained and you can read here), decided in Ford’s favor."

read the rest at debbieschlussel.com

Hariri is no Saint

Labels: » » » » » » » » »
the State of Lebanon is in conflict with UN Resolution 1701, have let Hezbollah into their government and have become a vassal of Syria

Although the Obama administration has hesitated before rushing headlong into renewing relations with Damascus, it has undertaken a series of gestures that have demonstrated that any real policy of isolation is over. This goes hand in hand with the broader regional stance of the administration of attempting "engagement" with the Iranian regime.

Far from signaling to Middle Eastern powers that a new world of cooperation is about to commence, what this US stance conveys to friends and foes in the region is that Washington no longer has the stomach for holding fast against the bid by Iran and its allies for regional hegemony.

The clients, and the clients of the clients, therefore move to make their accommodation with the changed reality.

they can't control themselves from murdering people? Do you have any idea how much money these people in power in the Middle East have? every criminal organization has conflicting parties that people might have empathy for. Every great dramatic villain has a sob story. That is the nature of evil. Were not the Germans themselves victims of harsh punitive actions from WWI?

In Washington, Lebanese President Michel Suleiman failed to persuadePresident Barack Obama to drop objections to Hizbullah's rearming, and instead "exert further pressure" on Israel to withdraw from disputed areas along its border with Lebanon. Suleiman acted "more like the Syrian ambassador than the Lebanese president," observed Farid Ghadry, the Washington-based head of the Reform Party of Syria.

Obama publicly told Suleiman he should enforce UN Resolution 1701 by disarming Hizbullah and halting its "extensive" arms smuggling, which poses "a threat to Israel." Suleiman disagreed, insisting that part of the resolution no longer applies to the militant group because it is a legitimate political party and part of Lebanon's government, which has authorized it to retain its weapons. The real threat, he told Obama, is from Israel.

The argument you have is they can't help but send missiles? If my neighbor next door were launching missiles to the next town and I knew that there would be missiles back... I'd do everything I could to get those missiles out of a residential area. These people are responsible and it is the population that will suffer. Their country is culpable and they will suffer casualties. I'm not going to let my family get killed because other people don't have the chutzpah to contain the hate in their neighborhood. If these people do not follow the terms agreed... the only situation is to kill back... and this is not said lightly because the missile capability is three times what it was in 2006. I suspect you have some kind of orchestrated bias against Jewish people living if you feel otherwise. Keep in mind that Hariri is backed by the Sauds. He has all the money in the world. if he wanted to he could buy soldiers with loyalty. he is meeting with Syria because he benefits double. don't believe that sob story about his dad for a second. these guys kill each other all the time and for all we know Assad had nothing to do with the death of his father. It might of been some fringe Shia group. Hariri is picking his allies. don't pity him. he isn't caught between anything. don't worry about these murderers. Hariri can afford a miliary. He chooses Syria because he is united in hate against Israel. if Sunni Hamas can take money from Iran... so can Hariri
original post 12/27/09
Last week's visit by Lebanese Prime Minister Sa'ad Hariri to Damascus is the latest marker in the return of the coercive Syrian presence in Lebanon. It is also an indication of Syria's successful defiance of the west.

Assad’s regime assassinated Saad Hariri’s father, Rafik, in 2005 for just gingerly opposing Syria’s occupation of Lebanon. There is no alternate universe where Saad Hariri is OK with this or where his generically “positive” statements at a press conference were anything other than forced.

via commentarymagazine.com

The pro-western and pro-Saudi March 14 movement, led by Hariri, achieved a modest victory in elections in June. This victory was effectively nullified in the lengthy coalition "negotiations" that followed. The new government as finally announced in November represented the unusual spectacle of a wholesale capitulation of the electoral victors before the vanquished.

The Hizbullah-led opposition kept their effective veto power in the Cabinet. The government's founding statement included an acknowledgement of the legitimacy of Hizbullah's continued armed presence.



Now, with Hezbollah playing a more active role in the Lebanese government, Lebanon could be held more responsible for Hezbollah actions against Israel, Israeli security officials and experts say.
Lebanon has to decide which side it's on. Either it can stand up to Hezbullah the way the Iranian people are now standing up to the mullahs or it can bear the consequences when Hezbullah uses their infrastructure to fire cannon fodder at Israel. While I feel sorry for those Lebanese who don't support Hezbullah and want to live in peace with us, I feel more sorry for the Israelis who are likely to be under fire by Hezbullah in the next war.

I was invited to dinner at Hariri’s house earlier this year and had a long and frank discussion about politics with him and some colleagues. I can’t quote him because the meeting was off the record, but trust me: the man is no friend of the Syrian government or Hezbollah, and it’s not just because someone in that crowd killed his father. His political party, the Future Movement, champions liberalism and capitalism, the very antithesis of what is imposed in Syria by Assad’s Arab Socialist Baath party regime and the totalitarian Velayat-e Faqih ideology enforced by the Khomeinists in Iran and in the Hezbollah-occupied regions of Lebanon.

Hezbollah and its sponsors in Tehran and Damascus have forced Hariri to do a number of things lately — to give it veto power in his government’s cabinet and to surrender to its continuing existence as a warmongering militia that threatens to blow up the country again by picking fights with the Israelis.

Hariri and his allies in parliament resisted an extraordinary amount of pressure on these points for months before caving in, but cave in they did. They didn’t have much choice. The national army isn’t strong enough to disarm Hezbollah,

and unlike Iran’s tyrant Ali Khamenei, Hariri doesn’t have his own private army. Hezbollah militiamen surrounded his house last year and firebombed his TV station when the government shut down its illegal surveillance system at the airport. At the end of the day, Hariri has to do what Hezbollah and its friends say unless someone with a bigger stick covers his back when push comes to shove.

No one has Hariri’s or Lebanon’s back, not anymore. He and his allies in the “March 14″ coalition have sensed this for some time, which is why Druze leader Walid Jumblatt has grudgingly softened his opposition to Assad and Hezbollah lately. When Hariri went to Damascus, everyone in the country, aside from useless newswire reporters, understood it meant Syria has re-emerged as the strong horse in Lebanon.

Walid Jumblatt is another member of what David Schenker calls the Murdered Fathers Club. Assad’s ruthless late father, Hafez Assad, put Jumblatt through a similarly gruesome experience back in the 70s during the civil war. First Assad murdered Walid’s father, Kamal, then summoned the surviving Jumblatt to Damascus and forced him to shake hands and pledge his allegiance. Who can even imagine what that must have felt like? Hariri knows now, and Jumblatt still tells everyone he meets all about it.

Hariri generally doesn’t like having long conversations with journalists on the record because he doesn’t want to calculate how everything he says will be simultaneously interpreted in Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Israel, the United States, France, and Saudi Arabia. I can’t say I blame him. He lives under virtual house arrest as it is, with barely more freedom of movement than Hassan Nasrallah. Here is something he said, though, back when it was safer for him to do so: “Action must be taken against Syria, like isolation, to make the Syrians understand that killing members of [Lebanon's] parliament will have consequences.”

The U.S. and France did effectively isolate Assad with Saudi assistance when George W. Bush and Jacques Chirac were in charge, but presidents Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy think they can save the Middle East by “engaging” its most toxic leaders. Syria, therefore, is no longer isolated. Lebanon’s little anti-Syrian government doesn’t stand a chance under these circumstances, especially not when Hezbollah is the dominant military power in the country.

“It’s a dangerous game these people are playing,” Lebanese activist and political analyst Eli Khoury said last time I spoke with him in Beirut, “but I think it’s only a matter of time until the newcomers burn their fingers with the same realities that we’ve seen over and over again. I’ve seen every strategy: Kissinger’s step-by-step approach, full engagement — which means sleeping with the enemy, basically — and the solid stand as with the Bush Administration. I’ve seen them all. The only one that works so far in my opinion, aside from some real stupid and dumb mistakes, is the severing of relationships. It made the Syrians behave.”

It did make the Syrians behave a bit for a while, but now the U.S., France, and Saudi Arabia are bringing Assad in from the cold and giving him cocoa. His influence, naturally, is rising again, in Lebanon and everywhere else. That’s good news for Hezbollah, of course, which means it’s also good news for Iran. It’s bad news for the Lebanese, the Americans, the French, the Saudis, and the Israelis. None of this was inevitable, but — in Lebanon, at least — it was predictable.

Is an Iranian intifada imminent?

Labels: » » » » »
An Iranian-style intifada seems to be in the making. At the beginning of the current period of opposition, which started soon after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's controversial reelection, quiet periods of seeming normalcy occurred between what were less frequent demonstrations.
This photo obtained by AP shows Iranian protesters beating police officers during an anti-government demo in Teheran on Sunday.
I have no doubt that the insurgency is real, but I'm not sure why anyone cares. These people are no more supportive of freedom then the present government. I have not heard any explanation about what type of government these people would support. Internationally the Green Revolution does not seem to have any different interest then the present administration. It is nothing but a power struggle that is common in Islamic culture.
Judging from the events of Ashura, however, the protests now seem to carry the potential to turn into a full-scale civil disobedience campaign, not unlike the first intifada the Palestinians initiated against Israel in 1987.
oh well happy joy joy... let them get a little taste of their own medicine
Such an uprising will mean continuous periods of strikes and civil disobedience, as well as more confrontations between members of the public and security forces.
wow... really? I'm upset
The main factor contributing to the new status quo is the unrelenting policies of the supreme leader, which have pitted his philosophy of the Islamic Republic against longstanding Islamic institutions.

THIS IS a battle that Khamenei will find extremely difficult to win. In fact, if developments continue in their current form, they can result in significant changes to the structure of his regime, or more drastically, lead to its total demise.
His decision to allow the Basij to mount an attack on mourners at Ayatollah Montazeri's funeral was one factor leading to the spread of opposition in rural areas, faster and more efficiently than any campaign the reformist camp could have orchestrated. Yes, members of the opposition tried to take advantage of the mayhem, but also many genuine mourners had come to pay homage to a grand ayatollah. To Khamenei's forces, they were all the same. To allow attacks against the residents of a holy city where the seeds of the 1979 revolution were planted was not just dead wrong from a religious perspective, it was politically counterproductive as well.
To make matters worse, the very next day, the supreme leader's forces attacked mourners attending a ceremony for Montazeri at Isfahan's Seyyed mosque, where inside members of the public were beaten. The Basijis also tried to assault Isfahan's former Friday prayers leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Jalaleddin Taheri, who had arranged the ceremony. However, his supporters protected him.
IF THE Shah had committed such an affront, one could have attributed it to his brute dictatorial secularism. But for the supreme leader of an Islamic republic to order violence against Islamic institutions means turning against the very establishment that formed the foundation - or the very DNA - of the current regime.
In 1987, to Palestinians, Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and the deteriorating political and economic situations there formed the nucleus of the political ideology that legitimized the first intifada.
those were different peoples. these are the same people cannibalizing... but I understand the media likes to glorify the Intifada whenever it can
Khamenei's increasing attacks against the Iranian public, followed by full-scale assaults against mosques and religious members of the community, are creating the nucleus of an ideology that is legitimizing opposition, not just in cities, but throughout Iran.
However, ideology is not enough. To succeed, what is needed is to increase the frequency of opposition to the point where the morale of the regime and its forces are sufficiently eroded and they can no longer afford to carry on with their current policies, or their ability to function.
Here again, Khamenei seems to be aiding the opposition. The brutal attack against the mourners at Montazeri's funeral meant that more people were motivated to turn up in the streets on Tasua (the day before Ashura), as well as on Ashura, which happened to fall on the seventh day of Montazeri's passing. In fact, small demonstrations have continued in different places since Montazeri was buried.
way to go Khamenei! keep up the great work. we are counting on you
Further, on Ashura, his forces killed Seyed Ali Habibi Mousavi Khameneh, the nephew of Mir Hossein Mousavi. It's very possible that he happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. However, the Mousavi family might understandably assume that he was targeted for assassination. After all, how is it possible that among thousands upon thousands of demonstrators, he was one of the few shot dead? Was he followed from the beginning by an assassination team? Was he marked for death before he left the house? These are questions that cannot be overlooked.
And now his funeral, as well as the seventh day of his death, will provide other occasions for the opposition to demonstrate. Add to this 15 religious holidays, plus at least five major political ones. Meanwhile, more are expected to be killed or arrested, meaning further mourning congregations and demonstrations. Put all of these dates together and the regime could start facing an unprecedented number of demonstrations.
Things could get much worse if the opposition turns to public strikes. With violence against the public expected to continue unabated and Ahmadinejad's plan to cut subsidies, translating to more economic misery, the regime could add to the attraction of this backbreaking scenario.
More than ever, the future of this regime hinges on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He can save his regime and keep it in its current form if he learns from his recent mistakes and modifies the way his forces and government reach out to the public. Failure to readjust could turn out to be a very costly mistake.
let's hope he doesn't learn a thing
This article was originally written for The Tehran Bureau, a partnership with PBS Frontline, at www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau.>
via jpost.com

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

So Sad, Too Bad: Egypt Thwarts Anti-Israel Americans’ Christmas Protest

Labels: »

Given that Palestinian Christians (and every other sort of Arab Christian) are under attack from the Muslims around them (as I detailed last week and do every Christmas), it’s kind of comical to read the story of Dorothy Ritter.

gosh I just love it when Debbie tells me these stories that have a happy ending ;-)


Israel-Hating Hags Dorothy Ritter & Kim Redigan Failed

Ritter, a Dearbornistan Christian “chick” (who looks like she has season tickets to the WNBA if ya know what I mean),


...wasted her Christmas flying to the Gaza Strip to protest the “evil Zionist Israelis.” She went there not to protest the persecution, killings, bombings, and other violent attacks by Gaza Palestinian Muslims on Christians (which have driven almost all of the Palestinian Christians out of Gaza), but to protest Israel for “blockading” Gaza from getting terrorist supplies and reinforcements.

here is the proof that the people of Gaza are starving and suffering...

If the animals in Gaza actually dared to stop their violent attacks and murders of innocent civilians, they wouldn’t be blockaded. This is war. You don’t help your sworn enemies blow you up.

But the joke was on this brushcut-encrusted Ellen-Degeneres-in-twenty-years-look-alike. After wasting Christmas and flying halfway around the world, she was prevented from engaging in her silly “protest” by the Egyptians. Same for Dearbornistan Heights-based Kim Redigan, another brushcut idiot who spent Christmas trying to protest against Israel, but failed epically.

So sad, too bad. I hope the falafel was good. . . and I wish them a pleasant Flight 253 back to Detroit, or better yet, a deliciouslunch in Tul Karem,” before they leave for home.

I usually like to add something to these posts where I pretty much take another blog and reblog it, but I have nothing to add

http://xrl.us/Islamic drivers have a license to kill on 443

Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
A7 News

A three-judge High Court panel ruled Tuesday afternoon that Highway 443, a major artery connecting northern Jerusalem with the city of Modi'in and Ben Gurion airport, must be open to Arabs from the Palestinian Authority. It has been closed to the PA since 2002 because of dozens of terrorist attacks on the thoroughfare.

The court panel accepted a petition against the closure from Arabs living in villages near the highway. The judges said although the military can limit traffic for security reasons, it cannot issue a blanket order that affects the Arab population in Judea and Samaria.

The judges’ opinion was written by Justice Uzi Fogelman, who reasoned that the road is supposed to serve the entire population and that closing it contravenes international law.

They emphasized that although security measures do not require that Arabs be prohibited from the highway, the ruling does not dictate future decisions by the military to limit travel because of security threats.

The ruling will take effect in five months in order to allow the IDF to establish new security measures.

Justice Edmund Levy dissented in part, arguing that the “military officers acted within their authority to decide to close the road to PA Arabs following serious terrorist attacks, which included the murder of Israelis on the highway and in the vicinity.”

He also noted that the IDF said it would be preferable not to ban all Arabs from the road and that it was looking for alternative measures.

MK Yaakov Katz, head of the National Union Party, responded to the ruling, "Highway 443 was closed to Arabs after much Jewish blood was spilled on it. How can Justices [Dori Beinisch and Fogelman adopt an anti-Jewish stance that goes against IDF recommendations and endangers Israeli citizens? This ruling expresses the stance of the Meretz party that has only three MK's in the Knesset, but of a majority on the Supreme Court who agree with it." He called for citizens affected by the ruling to initiate civil suits against the decision.

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Egypt claims Netanyahu willing to go back to armistice lines

After President Mubarak's meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu on Tuesday, the Egyptian government is claiming that Netanyahu is willing to return to the 1949 armistice lines that existed before the Six Day War.
The government of Egypt offered Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu rare praise following a meeting on Tuesday at Cairo’s Presidential Palace. After the Israeli premier met with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and other senior Egyptian officials, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit praised Netanyahu, claiming that Israel is prepared to withdraw to its 1967 borders.
I guess it would be an offense to Gheit's honor to admit that he didn't manage to talk Netanyahu into anything.
you would think Netanyahu would say so himself if that were true. bizarre.

Gates of Vienna: More on Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab

just like Osama Bin Ladin, Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab's family of Nigeria were the financial establishment of an Islamic community. Unlike what Ron Paul was claiming It isn't poverty, oppression or occupation that led this man to violence.
When news of yesterday’s terrorist incident over Detroit emerged, the wire services at first reported that the suspect, Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria, had been on the no-fly list, and should never have been allowed on the plane. Later news stories retracted that assertion, maintaining only that Mr. Abdulmutallab had been listed in Homeland Security’s “potential terrorists” database.

No we know why young Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab was listed as a potential terrorist (or should have been): his daddy warned us about him six months ago.

Here’s the story from Spits Nieuws, translated from the Dutch by our Flemish correspondent VH:

Nigerian is son of ex-minister

The 23-year-old Nigerian who yesterday attempted to commit a terrorist attack on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit is from a wealthy family. He is even the son of a former minister of Nigeria.

Umaru MutallabThis month the prominent 70-year-old businessman Alhaji Umaru Mutallab quit his position as director of First Bank of Nigeria, Nigeria’s oldest bank. He criticized his son, who had become ever more extremist. The father, according to the family, is devastated by the news of the failed terrorist attack by his son.

Six months ago the father informed the U.S. embassy in his country about the activities of his son. It is now being investigated why the 23-year-old man had never been placed on a black list.

The accused had had extreme views on religion since his high school years.

The father, Alhaji Umaru Abdul Mutallab, played a major role in introducing Islamic banking into Nigeria:
- - - - - - - - -
Umaru Mutallab [former Federal Minister, and Executive Chairman & Managing Director of United Bank for Africa (UBA)] was born in 1939 in Katsina. He is a former Federal Commissioner of Economic Development (1975) and also of Cooperation and Supply (1976).Umaru Mutallab recently played a major role in introducing Islamic banking into Nigeria. He was an executive director of First Bank and later became its Chairman, a position he holds till now.

Note: “Alhaji” is not the first name of the elder Mutallab, but rather an honorific, signifying that he has complete the Hajj (pilgrimage) to Mecca. To make the names even more confusing, the younger Mutallab seems to have affixed his father’s middle name to his surname, to create the new surname Abdulmutallab. Furthermore, at other times he has listed “Abdul” separately, moved his middle name around and added “Umar” as a new middle name, so that he is listed as “Farouk Umar Abdul Mutallab” in some news stories.

Which makes this “Mutallab” listed in the Nigerian Air Force Military School Jos Alumni Members Database very intriguing:

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Why Abbas Does Not Want To Resume Peace Talks - Hudson New York

Labels: »

The leaders of the Palestinian Authority have reached the conclusion that, under the current circumstances, it would be a waste of time to return to the negotiating table with Israel. They are convinced that the only way to get anything is by rallying pressure from the international community against Israel.

It is for this reason that representatives of the Palestinians have been negotiating with the Europeans and Americans about the peace process -- not with Israel.

The Palestinian leadership in Ramallah is negotiating about the peace process, but with the foreign ministers of France, Sweden, Norway, Germany and the UK and not with Israel. Almost every step this leadership takes is fully coordinated in advance with Western diplomats and their governments.

They believe that at present Israel is more isolated than ever in the international arena, particularly in light of the UN’s Gaza War report, the “Goldstone Report.”

The Palestinian leadership has chosen to confront Israel in the international arena, and not at the negotiating table. Abbas’s strategy is to further isolate Israel in the world through boycotts and anti-Israel resolutions at the UN and other international forums.

They see growing support for Palestinians in many European capitals, and are convinced that this will eventually be translated into heavy pressure on Israel.

Western governments are keeping the Palestinians from resuming peace talks with Israel. Instead of negotiating with Abbas, these governments should be urging him to return to the negotiations with Israel.

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

original drawing by Noah David Simon

Iran: A Secret Deal for Purified Uranium from Kazakhstan? | Enduring America

Labels: »
Borat's buddies are selling Iran some very expensive goodies...

flag IranThe Associated Press reports that Iran is close to clinching a deal to clandestinely import 1,350 tons of purified uranium ore from Kazakhstan.

The report was prepared by a member nation of the International Atomic Energy Agency and given to AP on the condition that the country not be identified because of the confidential nature of the information.

The reports claims Teheran is willing to pay $450 million for the shipment and added that “the price is high because of the secret nature of the deal and due to Iran’s commitment to keep secret the elements supplying the material”.

Clandestine imports are banned by the UN Security Council, and Iran is currently under sanctions that ban the importat of all items, materials, equipment, goods, and technology that could contribute to its enrichment activities.

A Western diplomat from a member of the IAEA’s 35-nation board said the report was causing “concern” among countries that have seen it and generating “intelligence chatter”.

A senior US official told the AP that Washington was aware of the intelligence report but declined to discuss specifics:

We are not going to discuss our private consultations with other governments on such matters but, suffice to say, we have been engaged with Kazakhstan and many of our other international nonproliferation partners on this subject in particular over the past several years. We will continue to have those discussions.

State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said: “The transfer of any uranium yellowcake … to Iran would constitute a clear violation of UNSC sanctions. We have been engaged with many of our international nonproliferation partners on Iran’s illicit efforts to acquire new supplies of uranium over the past several years.”

Purified ore, or uranium oxide — known as “yellowcake” — is processed into a uranium gas, which is then spun and re-spun to varying degrees of enrichment. Low enriched uranium is used for nuclear fuel, and upper-end high enriched uranium for nuclear weapons.

Kazakhstan is among the world’s three top producers of uranium, accounting for more than 8,500 tons last year. In comparison, Iran produces only an estimated 20 tons a year.

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Ron Ron Paul used the Occupation word on Larry King last night

Labels: »
who started with the language that obviously was not agreed on? break out those Stormfront photos....
and here is the picture of the esteemed Dr. Paul grinning it up with Don Black, owner and proprieter of Stormfront.

.By on 12.30.09 @ 6:09AM

A few days ago, I was on Larry King Live on CNN. the topic was terrorism and specifically the Christmas Day aerial bombing effort by a self-described Al Qaeda agent of an airliner near Detroit.

One of the other guests was Rep. Ron Paul of Texas. He said, at least as I understood it -- and I could be mistaken -- that the real fault for this terror attack lies with the United States for provoking al Qaeda by "occupying their land" --this is a paraphrase. I expressed shock at this line of approach. Rep. Paul -- as I recall -- said again that the U.S. was causing these attacks by our being "occupiers."

I said this line was something like "the tired old anti-Semitic line." I said this because in my long experience, those who talk about the U.S. "occupying" Moslem lands soon go to criticism of the U.S. for helping Israel -- a line long associated with Rep. Paul, as I understand, and again, maybe I am misinformed -- and then to biting criticism of Israel and then to bitter comments about Jews generally.

I was about to add that I was sure that Rep. Paul was not going that far. But Rep. Paul became so upset that I could not get in a word.

So let me say right now that if Rep. Paul says he is not taking that line, and is not an anti-Semite, I believe him, good for him and I am happy to know him.

That is what I would have said if I had been allowed to talk. Happy New Year.

Ron Paul has equated Israel with occupation in the past...
let it be a lesson for anyone who thinks Ron Paul can be debated fairly. As for Stein he should be ashamed for saying it isn't Islam that is the problem.

Israel and the Arabs agree! Jimmy Carter didn't apologize

Note that Carter does not specifically retract anything he has previously said or written. Even love for a grandson will not allow Carter to retract facts. He just apologizes for any hurt he may caused although the people he "hurt" can sure use some hurting on this issue.

...they said this. not me

US slams new plans to build in east Jerusalem | Israel | Jerusalem Post

The United States on Monday harshly criticized Israel's plans to build more housing in Jerusalem neighborhoods over the green line.

give a little and they want more eh?

Jerusalem was not to be an “international city” for all time as we have been lead to believe. The residents of Jerusalem were free to express modifications of regime of the City. The Jews had a 2:1 majority there.

I already in a previous post showed the Ethnic Cleansing that happened in Jerusalem in 1948

the United States is legally bound to not interfere with the borders of the former British Palestine Mandate...

United States Government and the “Mandate” Policy

Despite not being a member of the League, the U.S. Government

claimed on November 20, 1920 that the participation of the United States in WWI entitled it to be consulted as to the terms of the Mandate. The British Government agreed, and the outcome was an agreement calling to safeguard the American interests in Palestine. It concluded with a convention between the United Kingdom and the United States of America, signed on December 3, 1924.

It is imperative to note that the convention incorporated the complete text of the “Mandate for Palestine,” including the preamble!30 President Wilson was the first American president to support modern Zionism and Britain’s efforts for the creation of a National Home for Jews in Palestine (the text of the Balfour Declaration had been submitted to President Wilson and had been approved by him before its publication).

President Wilson expressed his deep belief in the eventuality of the creation of a Jewish State:

“I am persuaded,” said President Wilson on March 3rd, 1919, “that the Allied nations, with the fullest concurrence of our own Government and people, are agreed that in Palestine shall be laid the foundation of a Jewish Commonwealth.”31

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea:

“Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.

“Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected.”32


ART. 5. The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

get it? no foreign internationalist power

via israpundit.com and via docstalk.blogspot.com

"The United States opposes new Israeli construction in east Jerusalem," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said in a statement, calling the city a "permanent status issue" to be resolved through negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.

zzzz.... Israel doesn't have a negotiating partner. Israel is negotiating with the world, but the Arabs in Israel are going to let everyone else speak for them... while they plot more murder. I would say when will they learn... but unfortunately the world knows exactly what they are doing to Israel. the question is when will we as Jews learn?
    here is the paperwork that shows that Jerusalem was not to be divided:
A. SPECIAL REGIME The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a corpus separatum under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations. The Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations.

B. BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY The City of Jerusalem shall include the present municipality of Jerusalem plus the surrounding villages and towns, the most eastern of which shall be Abu Dis; the most southern, Bethlehem; the most western, ‘Ein Karim (including also the built-up area of Motsa); and the most northern Shu’fat, as indicated on the attached sketch-map (annex B).

But this regime was to be limited in time. It was not to be an “international city” for all time as we have been lead to believe.

The Statute elaborated by the Trusteeship Council the aforementioned principles shall come into force not later than 1 October 1948. It shall remain in force in the first instance for a period of ten years, unless the Trusteeship Council finds it necessary to undertake a re-examination of these provisions at an earlier date. After the expiration of this period the whole scheme shall be subject to examination by the Trusteeship Council in the light of experience acquired with its functioning. The residents the City shall be then free to express by means of a referendum their wishes as to possible modifications of regime of the City.

This provision for a referendum was of critical importance to the acceptance of Res 181 by Ben Gurion. He knew that the Jews were in a majority within these boundaries and would be in 10 years when the referendum was to be held. Thus he was confidant that Jerusalem would return to Jewish hands.

Keep in mind that the disposition of this area was to be determined not by Israel but by the residents of Jerusalem so defined. Currently the Jews have a 2:1 majority there.

Needless to say that after the Armistice Agreement of ‘49 the Jordanians who were in control of Jerusalem violated every provision of this resolution calling for among other things respect for holy places. The referendum never took place.

via israpundit.com and via docstalk.blogspot.com

...but negotiations seem to be a priority of the United States and not the law

"Neither party should engage in efforts or take actions that could unilaterally pre-empt, or appear to pre-empt, negotiations," he said. "Rather, both parties should return to negotiations without preconditions as soon as possible."

what negotiations? they don't want peace. they don't want Jews.

A State Department official told The Jerusalem Post that Israel had informed the Americans of the move ahead of its announcement, and that Washington had conveyed its displeasure at the decision.

"The government of Israel noted its plans to issue tenders in east Jerusalem and we strongly objected, noting that these types of announcements harm peace efforts," the official said.

Still, Gibbs ended his statement on a positive note, saying that "we believe that through good faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem, and safeguards its status for people around the world."

Gibbs' statement came on the heels of an announcement made earlier Monday by government spokesman Mark Regev, which stated that nearly 700 apartments had been approved for construction in the existing Jewish neighborhoods of Neveh Ya'akov, Pisgat Ze'ev and Har Homa.

"We make a distinction between the West Bank and Jerusalem," Regev said regarding the new plans. "Jerusalem is our capital and remains such."

Responding to the American displeasure, senior government officials on Monday evening stressed that the US had not been surprised by the announcement of the new building projects in the three existing neighborhoods.

"We have full transparency with the Americans," one official said. "There are no surprises."

Not in direct reference to this issue, Israel's ambassador to the US Michael Oren told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday that it was clear that the US and Israel had differences of opinion on Jerusalem, but that these differences were not new and preceded the current administration by decades.

"The American position [on Jerusalem] has remained unchanged in some ways since 1948, and in certain ways since 1967," Oren said. "America has never, going back to [US President Harry] Truman, never recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. And in 1967, America's policy, starting with the Johnson administration, was that it was opposed to any attempt to what they called 'alter the demographic reality by unilateral measures.'"

That has always been the US policy, Oren said, and what changes from administration to administration is not the policy, but how vigorously it is applied.

"There has been no departure from policy in Obama's position," he said, "just a greater willingness to apply it."

He said that rather than continually pressing him on the issue, a pattern has developed whereby when there are announcements of new projects in east Jerusalem, the US raises its objections and states its position on Jerusalem, which is then followed by Israel reiterating its position.

Government spokesmen stressed that the approvals of new housing in Jerusalem was part of a plan calling for the construction of some 6,500 units throughout the country, including 2,000 in Arab-Israeli and Druse areas. A decision to exclude Jerusalem from this list would be tantamount to accepting the Palestinian condition that all construction must stop in east Jerusalem before peace negotiations could be restarted, something the government was not willing to do.

Indeed, as news of the construction plans for the three existing Jewish neighborhoods circulated on Monday, the Jerusalem Municipality announced that it was in the process of authorizing 500 new housing units in Silwan, primarily for the east Jerusalem neighborhood's Arab residents.

Although municipality officials on Monday afternoon downplayed the link between the plans in Silwan and Regev's announcement, the plan for Silwan includes the rezoning of the western slopes of the neighborhood to permit residential construction of up to four floors. Currently, homes in Silwan are limited to two floors.

"Such a re-zoning would allow for legalized housing for about 500 families in Silwan and an addition of 500 new housing units to be issued permits, totaling an addition of 1,000 housing units to the area," a statement from the municipality read.

Municipality figures show some 71 structures with valid demolition orders in this area of Silwan alone, but only 10 of them currently exceed four stories in height.

If approved by the City Council, however, the municipality said that the plan would provide "solutions for the lack of affordable housing in the area and allow for about 90 percent of the housing violations to be theoretically legalized."