So now it turn out to be Richard Goldstone--author of the notorious Goldstone report--who is politicizing his grandson's bar mitzvah. Jewish authorities in South Africa didn't "ban" Goldstone from the synagogue at which his grandson was being bar mitzvahed, as Goldstone and his supporters had alleged. A small group of protestors had said they would exercise their right of expression to picket Goldstone. Though they clearly had the right to do so, most Jews in South Africa and elsewhere--including me--were uncomfortable with the idea of picketing a grandfather attending his grandson's bar mitzvah. It was Goldstone who decided not to attend and instead to publicize the matter.
The South Africa Board of Deputies have now persuaded the protestors to pick a different time and place to show their disdain for Goldstein. The matter should have been put to rest, with Goldstone quietly attending the bar mitzvah. But Goldstone won't let it go. He has attacked the Chief Rabbi of South Africa, who was instrumental in working out a compromise where the protests would be called off and Goldstone would agree to meet with Jewish leaders. Goldstone escalated the dispute by writing a letter to the local newspaper complaining that,
"the Chief Rabbi would so brazenly politicize the occasion of my 13 year-old grandson's bar mitzvah to engage in further personal attacks on me."But it was Goldstone who brazenly politicized the bar mitzvah by mischaracterizing the Chief Rabbi's statement and using it as an excuse to continue the controversy about the bar mitzvah. The alleged "personal attack" by the Chief Rabbi consisted of a statement that every synagogue:
"should welcome in a tolerant and nonjudgmental way all who seek to enter and join in our service and pray to God."The Chief Rabbi also exercised his own freedom of speech to express his opinion--an entirely accurate one--that the Goldstone report:
"has unfairly done enormous damage to the reputation and safety of the State of Israel and her citizens."Was the Chief Rabbi obligated to remain silent about the report until the bar mitzvah is over? It would have been irresponsible of Rabbi Goldstein to say nothing in the face of the evil represented by the Goldstone report and its biased authors. Is it not enough that he curbed those who wanted to protest in front of the synagogue? It is Goldstone who is using his grandson's bar mitzvah as a shield against legitimate criticism, just as he has used his "jewishness" as a shield against criticism of the Goldstone report.
Goldstone has not complained about another group of rabbis who have politicized his grandson's bar mitzvah in an effort to support the Goldstone report and its mendacious conclusions. A group of rabbis, many of whom have long records of anti-Israel activism, authored a "Rabbinic letter" to Goldstone congratulating him on his grandson's bar mitzvah and using the occasion to make virulently anti-Israel claims, including the blood libel that Israel deliberately targeted innocent Palestinian civilians without any military purpose. These ignorant rabbis, most of whom I am sure never read the 500 page report, went out of their way to "affirm" the "findings" of the Goldstone report, despite the fact that virtually every credible academic who has studied the report has found its findings to be unfounded and false.
These bigoted rabbis, who have no expertise in military matters, are prepared to contradict the military expertise of one of the world's most experienced counter insurgency military experts, Colonel Richard Kemp, who said,
"I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when an army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF [did] in Gaza."Goldstone of course refused to consider Kemp's testimony and has characterized it as irrelevant to the report's findings.
These "rabbis for Hamas" have no shame and no credibility. They exploit their rabbinical status to support any conclusion that undercuts self defense Israeli actions without regard to the evidence and without regard to the truth.
Not surprisingly, the worst of these rabbis (and that is saying a lot), Michael Lerner, after attempting to politicize the bar mitzvah by offering his anti-Israel synagogue for the event, has decided to honor Richard Goldstone with Tikkun Magazine's "Ethics Award." I guess all it takes to be honored by Tikkun is to pass Lerner's litmus test of lying about Israel. That's Lerner's definition of "ethics." There are some good people on the advisory board of Tikkun Magazine. They now have an obligation to reconsider their membership unless they wish to be associated with a rabbi who is prepared to accuse Israel, in the absence of any evidence, of deliberately setting out to murder Palestinian civilians without any military purpose.
Let Richard Goldstone enjoy his grandson's bar mitzvah without anyone politicizing it, but let every thoughtful person study the Goldstone report and refuse to remain silent about its bias, its lies, its damage to the peace process and its dangers to Israel's security. Richard Goldstone should not use his grandson's bar mitzvah to selectively silence rabbis who disagree with his report, while encouraging rabbis who agree with it to use the bar mitzvah as a sword against the report's critics and as a shield against legitimate criticism. His grandson deserves better.
They don't like women... they hate men ....If the ladies really want a woman's softball team they should ask for one instead of hiding behind the gay rhetoric. Certainly major league baseball for a very good reason is gender exclusive
The lawsuit, filed in a federal district court, alleges that the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Association (NAGAAA) violates the Washington State law against sexual orientation discrimination in public accommodations. It says the group did so by imposing a rule that teams participating in the 2008 Gay Softball World Series could have no more than two heterosexuals per team.
Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), said that the organization has “tried very hard” to settle this case and have NAGAAA change its policy, but to no avail.
“We are still hopeful that NAGAAA will agree to change the policy, as that is our goal here,” said Minter. “We strongly support LGBT sporting leagues, but the best practice, and the only lawful one, is not to exclude players based on their sexual orientation.”“NAGAAA’s committee refused to entertain the idea that the players could be bisexual,” said NCLR. “In response to a player’s statement that he was attracted to both men and women, a NAGAAA member responded, ’This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.’”
In many ways, Garlasco was an odd fit at HRW. Prior to being hired in 2003, he had served as the head of “high-value targeting” at the Defense Intelligence Agency during the Iraq war. He opposed the invasion, however, and joined HRW shortly after the fall of Baghdad. His first assignment at his new job was to investigate collateral damage from the airstrikes he had helped plan. Whitson told me that Garlasco (who was one of only a handful of people at HRW with military experience) brought unique skills to the organization and enhanced its credibility. “He could look at the plumes in the sky and know exactly what weapon that was,” she says. “He could look at a canister and know what kind of a munition it was. He could look and see where the guidance system is.”
Garlasco was hardly a reflexive apologist for Israel. His time on the ground in Gaza convinced him that the IDF had a lot to answer for—using Palestinians as human shields, heavy artillery fire in densely populated areas, and rules of engagement so lax that large numbers of civilian deaths were inevitable. And he thought that both sides, Hamas and Israel, had committed war crimes during the conflict. Still, he believed that there was a fog of war that most of his colleagues failed to appreciate. “He said ... ‘If I were an Israeli, I’d be so frustrated,’” recalls one friend. “You are trying to get people who are shooting from civilian areas, and how do you deal with that? I mean, I remember him talking about that—that it’s an impossible quandary for a soldier. Sometimes, they actually turn out to be kids playing on the roof, and sometimes they’re guys with missiles.”
During the war, Garlasco had gotten a lot of attention for discussing Israel’s use of a chemical agent called white phosphorous. CNN, BBC, and Al Jazeera ran segments featuring Garlasco explaining the dangers white phosphorous posed to civilians: On contact with skin, it could cause second- and third-degree burns; it could even burn down houses. Soon, news reports all around the world were repeating the story.
But Garlasco would later tell Apkon and others that he thought the white phosphorous controversy had been blown out of proportion. From his experience at the Pentagon, Garlasco knew that U.S. and British forces had used white phosphorous in Iraq and Afghanistan, and usually for the same purpose that the IDF used it in Gaza: as a smokescreen to obscure troop movements on the ground—a permissible use under international law. To be sure, Garlasco did not believe that the IDF had used white phosphorous properly in every instance. But he told multiple people that he thought HRW had placed too much emphasis on this issue—specifically telling one person that he had been pushed by HRW headquarters to focus on white phosphorous at the expense of topics he thought more deserving of attention because, he suspected, it was regarded as a headline-generating story. (HRW denies that it pushed Garlasco on the subject.) What’s more, while making legal judgments was not within Garlasco’s jurisdiction, he told Apkon that he did not think Israel’s use of white phosphorous amounted to a war crime. (In a subsequent report on white phosphorous, the first of six thus far on the Gaza war, HRW would say that evidence “indicates the commission of war crimes.”)
Beyond these disagreements, Garlasco had larger critiques of HRW. He thought that the organization had a habit of ignoring necessary context when covering war, he told Apkon; and he told multiple sources that he thought Whitson and others at MENA had far-left political views. As someone who didn’t have strong ideological commitments of his own on the Middle East, this bothered him. “When he reported on Georgia, his firm feeling was he could report whatever he wanted,” says one source close to Garlasco. “And, when he was talking to headquarters, the feeling was, let the chips fall where they may. He did not feel that way dealing with the Middle East division.” In addition, Garlasco alleged in conversations with multiple people that HRW officials in New York did not understand how fighting actually looked from the ground and that they had unrealistic expectations for how wars could be fought. To Garlasco, the reality of war was far more complicated. “He looks at that organization as one big attempt to outlaw warfare,” says the person close to Garlasco. Around the time he had coffee with Apkon last February, he was beginning to look for another job.
But, before he could find one, the Nazi memorabilia story had landed in The New York Times. The controversy was overblown—Garlasco’s interest in the subject stemmed from the fact that his grandfather had been conscripted into the Nazi army, and he collected all sorts of World War II artifacts, not just Third Reich items—but it was enough to ruin whatever future he had left at HRW. Watching the scandal spin out of control, Apkon took note of the irony that the pro-Israel community had lynched one of the people at HRW who was most sympathetic to its concerns. “You’re sitting there watching this, and you realize: They’re going after the wrong guy!” Apkon says. “He’s not coming with a political agenda. He’s the one guy that’s there that’s trying to make balanced decisions and judgments about this stuff.”
Perhaps if he was as concerned about world Judaism as he was about his own ass then I might have more empathy to a rich and powerful military insider who had an axe to grind with Israel. The mere fact that he also has a problem with Hamas does not make anything he did any more true.
And police are now considering closing off the Damascus and Lions Gates altogether during the parade.
The police are considering closing off the Shechem and Lions Gates of the Old City gates to Jews during the annual Jerusalem Day parade in two weeks. Public Security Minister Yitzchak Aharonovitch told National Union Knesset Member Uri Ariel Tuesday a final decision will be made after assessing the situation.The Lions Gate, which is located on the eastern side of the Old City, is the gate through which IDF troops entered the Old City in 1967.
The annual parade features a “flag dance,” which is scheduled to pass through the gates
One more interesting discussion between Fayyad and a young man named Yasser mentions that he works at an Israeli factory and is concerned that Fayyad is going to stop Palestinian Arabs from working in Israeli factories - he might have meant in the West Bank. He mentioned that work conditions are better on the Israeli side than the PalArab side, and asked, given high expenses that force Arabs to seek work in Israel, if Fayyad was going to restrict workers from having jobs in Israel, does he have a plan to employ them?
In Palestinian culture, it is more important if one graduates from an Israeli prison than from the University of Texas at Austin.
Fayyad never spent a day in an Israeli jail. Nor did he or any of his sons take an active role in the “struggle” against Israel.
The first question that people would ask Fayyad -- when and if he runs in a new election -- is, “What sacrifices did you make in the struggle against Israel?”
Palestinians will want to know if Fayyad has ever been detained or targeted in any other way by Israel. They would want to know if any of Fayyad’s sons had participated in demonstrations or attacks against Israel. This is why Palestinians who have sat in Israeli prisons for security offenses now hold senior positions in the Palestinian Authority.
"Fayyad has taken a lead role in the campaign to implement an international boycott of Israeli products. Over the past couple of years he has sought to take control over the PA's security forces not to fight terror, but to prevent Israel from fighting terror. Finally, since the Hamas victory in the PA legislative elections in 2006, he has overseen the transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas. In short, Fayyad, a former World Bank employee, is not a "moderate," as his supporters in the US and Europe claim."
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad told a crowd that a future Arab state in Judea and Samaria must be free of all Jews. Fayyad, who was never elected to his office democratically, was an economist for the International Monetary Fund until being handpicked by former United States President George W. Bush to lead the PA.
via hudsonny.org - Khaled Abu Toameh
There is a basic principle in Islamic scripture—unknown to most not-so-observant Muslims and most non-Muslims—called "commanding right and forbidding wrong." It obligates Muslim males to police behavior seen to be wrong and personally deal out the appropriate punishment as stated in scripture. In its mildest form, devout people give friendly advice to abstain from wrongdoing. Less mild is the practice whereby Afghan men feel empowered to beat women who are not veiled.
By publicizing the supposed sins of Messrs. Stone and Parker, Mr. Amrikee undoubtedly believes he is fulfilling his duty to command right and forbid wrong. His message is not just an opinion. It will appeal to like-minded individuals who, even though they are a minority, are a large and random enough group to carry out the divine punishment. The best illustration of this was demonstrated by the Somali man who broke into Mr. Westergaard's home in January carrying an axe and a knife.
Check Boston Globe for a report, "'South Park' vs. Revolution Muslim."
And Ann Althouse, "Comedy Central cowers in the face of a murder threat/warning against "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker." (Via Memeorandum.) And at Gay Patriot:
Those in our media élites have been taught to see “the other” as the victim of Western cultural hegemony, hence they excuse the violent posturing (and actions) of those deemed spokesmen for (or representatives of) the Third World and/or the “oppressed.” By contrast, any attempt to stand up for the ideas which made this nation great are seen as retrograde, reversion to their perverted image of what our nation’s past was. (Perverted because they define our past by its worst aspects, oblivious to the fact that at least since Reagan, conservatives don’t want to turn back the clock.)Plus, some video background:
The teaching moment began the day we toppled Saddam from power. We did not notice. We were busy congratulating ourselves for liberating Iraq. But the Arab, Sunni Muslim world was not celebrating. Their view was that our invasion of the Sunni heartland unshackled the beast of Shia Islam which had been chained for a “thousand years.”
Since then, all of Iraq’s Sunni neighbors have struggled to curtail Shia power in Iraq, and its growing influence throughout the region. Consequently, some Sunni regimes which have been occasionally cooperative with us in the Middle East now see us as unwitting friends of their theological enemies. No longer can we trust these Sunni regimes to work in concert with our efforts in the region.
This is one reason why countries such as Saudi Arabia, Syria and others have permitted many of their citizen-jihadists to fight “the good war” against American troops in Iraq: They do not want us to succeed. They cannot digest the image that the former seat of the Sunni Abassid Caliphate and capital of oil-rich Iraq would be ruled by the Shia, as would be the case if we succeeded in establishing a peaceful, united, democratic Iraq. The Shia, who form a large majority of Iraq’s population, would best any coalition of Sunni political factions. Moreover, if the U.S. and its allies succeed in Iraq, Muslims throughout the region would be tempted to see a Shia-controlled Iraq and Shia Iran as the models to emulate instead if the Sunni model.
These Sunni states also fear instability among the Shia populations inside their borders. For instance, the al-Saud family in Arabia will worry about the majority Shia population at the center of its oil empire in the Eastern Province of al-Hasa. The minority Sunni al-Khalifa family in Shia Bahrain will be thrust into a state of anxiety, and there is the high likelihood of unrest among Kuwait’s 30% Shia Muslim population.
"The rich just don't have enough money. You either have to tax more of the income distribution or find other sources of revenue." Roberton Williams, senior fellow at the Urban Institute. "There is a growing awareness of the need for fundamental tax reform. I think a VAT and a high-end income tax have got to be on the table." Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND).
"I know that there's been a lot of talk around town lately about the value-added tax. That is... something that has worked for some countries. It's something that would be novel for the United States. And before, you know, I start saying 'this makes sense or that makes sense,' I want to get a better picture of what our options are."
VAT is a sign of a 3rd world economy or a sign that we are headed there.
Value added tax (VAT) is similar to a sales tax. Maurice Lauré, Joint Director of the French Tax Authority, the Direction générale des impôts, was first to introduce VAT on April 10, 1954, although German industrialist Dr. Wilhelm von Siemens proposed the concept in 1918. Initially directed at large businesses, it was extended over time to include all business sectors. In France, it is the most important source of state finance, accounting for nearly 50% of state revenues.
Personal end-consumers of products and services cannot recover VAT on purchases, but businesses are able to recover VAT (input tax) on the products and services that they buy in order to produce further goods or services that will be sold to yet another business in the supply chain or directly to a final consumer. In this way, the total tax levied at each stage in the economic chain of supply is a constant fraction of the value added by a business to its products, and most of the cost of collecting the tax is borne by business, rather than by the state. VAT was invented because very high sales taxes and tariffs encourage cheating and smuggling. Critics point out that it disproportionately raises taxes on middle- and low-income homes.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit referred to Israel as an "enemy" during a press conference in Beirut on Saturday.
Aboul Gheit said concerns expressed by Israel and the United States on the alleged transfer of Scud missiles from Syria to Hezbollah were "ridiculous".
"Anyone who is familiar with the (Scud) missile knows that it cannot be smuggled or concealed," he said.
Following talks with Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Foreign Minister 'Ali Al-Shami, Aboul Gheit was asked whether he was visiting Beirut in order to convey a warning from Israel.
The Egyptian minister said in response that the purpose of his trip was not to relay messages "from the enemy to a sister Arab state."
Aboul Gheit also said Cairo would stand by Lebanon and Syria in case they were attacked.
His statement made the headlines of a number of Arab newspapers, including the London-based Al Hayat and Asharq Al-Awsat, Saudi daily Al-Madina and Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Rai.
The Egyptian press chose to play down the minister's comment.
An official in Jerusalem told Ynet that Israel deems the remark "very harsh."
Meanwhile, in his first speech since returning to Egypt from Germany, where he underwent successful surgery for an inflamed gall bladder, President Hosni Mubarak said on the occasion of the 28th anniversary of Israel's withdrawal from Sinai that his country will remain committed to peace if Israel does the same.
this is an unbiased news source?
I mentioned yesterday that Hamas was upset at an on-line ad that was seen at the Reuters Arabic service site, offering a $10 million reward for information on the whereabouts of Gilad Shalit.
Reuters' response to the terrorist group is instructive.
Palestine Today reports that Reuters responded to the criticism, saying that it was an automated ad placed there by Google Ads, and not - Allah forbid! - placed by any Reuters staffers. After all, an ad that seeks to free a prisoner illegally held in an unknown location without any access to the Red Cross would be thoroughly offensive to any Reuters employee, right?
Reuters then cravenly added that they immediately acted to remove the ad, and "we are now taking steps to ensure non-recurrence of such things in the future."
The team say they recovered wooden specimens from a structure on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey that carbon dating proved was 4 800 years old, around the same time the ark is said to have been afloat.
"It's not 100 percent that it is Noah's Ark but we think it is 99,9 percent that this is it," Yeung Wing-cheung, a Hong Kong documentary filmmaker and member of the 15-strong team from Noah's Ark Ministries International told AFP.
The structure had several compartments, some with wooden beams, which were believed to house animals, he said.
The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds that one had never been found above 3 500 metres in the vicinity, Yeung said.
Local Turkish officials will ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archaeological dig is conducted, Yeung added.
The biblical story says God decided to flood the earth after seeing how corrupt it had become, and told Noah to build an ark and fill it with two of every animal species.
After the flood waters receded, the Bible says, the ark came to rest on a mountain. Many believe that Mount Ararat, the highest point in the region, is where the ark and her inhabitants came aground. - AFP
A Russian website is reporting that Israel and Russia are planning a joint venture to produce unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), otherwise known as drones (Hat Tip: Will).
State Technology Corporation Rostekhnologii plans to establish a joint venture with Israel Airspace Industry for the production of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the Russian corporation's head said on Wednesday.
...and I mentioned the U.S new super fast attack plan that will make Nuclear Weapons obsolete (capable of reaching any corner of the earth from the United States in under an hour and with such accuracy and force that they would greatly diminish America’s reliance on its nuclear arsenal) Unfortunately the plan that was started by Bush is being compromised by Obama and he is waving it around for the Russians and Chinese like a new Dildo
also Obama wants to teach Muslims to shoot rockets
Successful completion of the negotiations would make Jordan the second Arab state in less than a year, following the United Arab Emirates, to secure nuclear assistance from Washington. Any pact would constitute an international treaty and need the approval of Congress.
Jordan has signed an agreement with France's nuclear giant Areva, giving the company exclusive uranium mining rights.
The deal was agreed on Sunday during a visit by Francois Fillon, the French prime minister, who was received by King Abdullah II.
The agreement gives Areva exclusive rights to extract and mine uranium in the central parts of Jordan.
The desert kingdom, which is poor in energy and water resources, is seeking to develop nuclear energy to generate power and desalinate water.
Fillon said he also spoke with Samir Rifai, the Jordian PM, about the prospects for building nuclear plants by French firms in the Gulf of Aqaba on the Red Sea.
meanwhile those Russians are sleeping with everyone....
A report in the London-based pan-Arabic daily al-Hayat claims that Russia has supplied Syria with the S-300 air defense system.
The London daily Al-Hayat reports, citing a Russian source, that Russian President Vladimir Medvedev is to visit Syria on May 11 to discuss promoting Syria-Russia military and other cooperation.
According to the paper, in accordance with contracts signed between the two, Russia has supplied Syria with S-300 and Iskander missile defense systems, and there are contacts between the sides for the provision of new models of MiG aircraft and air defense systems.
It's an Orgy of hardware and everybody is doing business with everyone... too bad machines don't carry venereal deseases, but something tells me the Syrians will want all those Russian prostitutes that are all the rage in the Mid-East in such places like Dubai. Whores for WAR!
wow... with friends like these Russians and Obama... who needs Syria?
http://xrl.us/FOXNEWS is Sharia compliant. Is this what Rupert means by Conservative?
...Meanwhile, none other than Bill O’Reilly has jumped on board with our society’s dhimmis. In a recent episode of his show, he stated South Park was wrong to do the Mohammed shows and he surrendered to the forces who killed filmmaker Theo van Gogh, joining those who would rather sacrifice the right to free speech than confront Sharia. His comments included the theme of what bad judgment the creators of South Park showed by engaging in behavior that could get them killed. Imagine during the time of Nazi Germany someone arguing, “Yeh those Nazis are really crazy, don’t piss them off.”
Rather than praise Parker’s and Stone’s courage, stand up for their right to make a script that they wish to make, and denounce those who threatened their lives and the tenets of the Islamic religion that sanction such threats, O’Reilly publicly promoted submitting to Sharia Law.
Is O’Reilly too personally scared to take the right stance? Does he not understand the key issues at stake? Does his career mean more to him than the vital principle of freedom of speech or does he want to please Fox News’ Saudi masters? Perhaps time will tell.
In behaving like a dhimmi, O’Reilly is complicit in the tragic process occurring right before our eyes: the capitulation of the West to Sharia Law. For this, O’Reilly is the ultimate Pinhead.
If limited-government conservatives are dreaming of taking back America for fiscal sanity in the November elections, they should study how the unprecedented decline in marriage and the increase in illegitimacy are the major causes of our bloated government and its gigantic welfare spending. In 2008, 40.6% of children born in the United States were born outside of marriage; that's 1,720,000 children. This is not, as the media try to tell us, a teenage problem. Only 7% of those illegitimate babies were born to girls under age 18, and over three-fourths were born to women over age 20. The problem is the collapse of marriage as the social institution responsible for the costs of the care of children. via investors.com
image via apimages.com
He looks ... just ... a ... little ... too ... exulted, if you ask me. It's as if he's been spending too much time watching '80s Canadian TV pedo-perv Fergie Oliver go for itty-bitty... you can guess by watching this video:
And then took a few rides around California with this suspected bomb expert and his:"suspicious wire, with an on/off switch" in his pants pocket [that just happened to be] "found to extend from the pants pocket to the subject's anus."
I say keep it up, Joey. Between your antics and the Narcissist in Chief's constant amateurisms, the TEA party movement could disband today and you guys would still get your butts whipped in November.
Via Allahpundit UPDATE: Later in the day, Pluggers took the group to an amusement park (via Blogwonks): But not before he channeled Howard Dean (h/t: Matt, @Conservative Hideout) ORIGINAL POST: Joey Mumbles obviously went nuts today. Via Allahpundit UPDATE: Later in the day, Pluggers took the group to an amusement park (via Blogwonks): But not before he channeled Howard Dean (h/t: Matt, @Conservative Hideout) ORIGINAL POST: Joey Mumbles obviously went nuts today.
Another Perspective on the Anat Kamm Affair: How could a person like Ayalla Procaccia remain on Supreme Court??Labels: Anat Kamm» Ayalla Procaccia» Double Standards. Hypocrisy» Haaretz
Anat Kamm the young woman who stole some 2,000 documents - many top secret - from the head of Central Command during her IDF service, and turned them over to a http://xrl.us/Haaretz reporter who is currently hiding out somewhere in England. Anat Kam has been under house arrestvia israelmatzav.blogspot.com
Meanwhile... Zionist young girls who chose to disobey the state because the state was throwing Jews out of their homes do not have the privilege that Anat Kamm does to be under house arrest, and have to suffer a jail term before conviction. The Jewish Leftist establishment in Israel is hypocrisy at it's highest level.
You see, my daughter Chaya was also deemed a danger to public security and the State. Five years ago, at the age of 14, she was arrested during an anti-disengagement demonstration and accused of speaking rudely to a policewoman. She was brought before the juvenile judge in Tel Aviv, not far from where an 18-year old Anat was living at the time. The State prosecutor in our case asked the judge to keep my Chaya in jail until the end of the legal proceedings against her. On what grounds? Chaya was, you see, an ideologically motivated criminal. And because of her ideology she was unstopable. And dangerous to public and the State.
What was so dangerous about this girl? She participated in another non-violent civil disobedience demonstration a month before, was arrested, and released to yeshuv arrest, which forbade her from going to a similar demonstration. And now she disregarded that prohibition and refused to sit quetly while her friends were being thrown out of their homes. Thus, in the words of the prosecutor, her danger to the security of the State and the public was clear. Incredibly, the judge accepted this ridiculous argument.
In counter-argument I asked the judge to release my daughter to a full house arrest. I promised that we would keep her under 24/7 supervision. To no avail. The judge decided that we, the parents, could not be trusted to keep our dangerously criminal child from harming the Israeli public.
Israel is on its own. Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has known this since January 2009. The Obama administration has known this since November 2008. And now the American public is coming to know it, for President Obama's thin veneer of plausible deniability has been wearing thin. The New York Times today reduces that veneer of words to a transparent plastic wrap over the Obama administration's deeds and actions against Israel.
We are to now believe that, because of threats to American forces in the region, America must "balance support for Israel against other American interests." From the New York Times article Obama Phrase Highlights Shift on Middle East, the first few paragraphs must be read very carefully. Not because the words are confusing or nuanced, but because they are so vitally important to grasp.
It was just a phrase at the end of President Obama's news conference on Tuesday, but it was a stark reminder of a far-reaching shift in how the United States views the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and how aggressively it might push for a peace agreement. When Mr. Obama declared that resolving the long-running Middle East dispute was a "vital national security interest of the United States," he was highlighting a change that has resulted from a lengthy debate among his top officials over how best to balance support for Israel against other American interests.
How aggressively might the Obama administration "push for a peace agreement"? Vice President Biden snubbed Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu by showing up 90 minutes late for a state dinner in Israel, upset that Israel decided to build and renovate homes in Jerusalem. This is how this White House conducts business. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton berated Netanyahu in a reportedly expletive-filled phone call. In a later White House visit by Netanyahu, President Obama also laid into the Israeli prime minister and then abruptly left him. After sitting for 30 minutes, Netanyahu took his team of advisors and left the White House.To continue reading this article pleaseclick on Threats Watch And here is the rest of it.
I'm glad he is speaking out. maybe he can convince his dad. I'm reposting the whole thing from Carl of Israel Matzav because I think he is making some valid points. I never thought I would say that about a Paul.
Rand Paul, who is seeking the Republican nomination for the Senate from Kentucky, has issued a statement entitled The United States Special Relationship with Israel, in which he takes positions on Israel that are far from those advocated by his father, Texas Congressman Ron Paul.
Israel and the United States have a special relationship. With our shared history and common values, the American and Israeli people have formed a bond that unites us across the many thousands of miles between our countries and calls us to work together towards peace and prosperity for our countries.Is this for real? Well George W. Bush was a lot less hostile to Israel than his father George H.W. Bush. There's more comparing the views of Ron and Rand Paul here.
The free trade agreement that has existed, and been subsequently strengthened, between our countries since 1985 is a tremendous mutual benefit. As a United States Senator, I would work against the growing protectionist sentiment in our country and defend free trade with Israel.
I would never vote to place trade restrictions on Israel, and I would filibuster any attempts to place sanctions on Israel or tariffs on any Israeli goods.
The issue of Palestine is incredibly difficult and complex. The entire world wishes for peace in the region, but any arrangement or treaty must come from Israel, when she is ready and when her conditions have been met.
I strongly object to the arrogant approach of Obama administration, itself a continuation of the failures of past U.S. administrations, as they push Israel to make security concessions behind thinly veiled threats.
Only Israel can decide what is in her security interest, not America and certainly not the United Nations. Friends do not coerce friends to trade land for peace, or to give up the vital security interests of their people.
As a United States Senator, I would never vote to condemn Israel for defending herself.
Whether it is fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon, combating Hamas-linked terrorists in Gaza or dealing with potential nuclear threats in the Persian Gulf, Israeli military actions are completely up to the leaders and military of Israel, and Israel alone.
It is not the place of outsiders to meddle or pass judgment or to use our power or relationship to force Israel to go against her own interest for the sake of “peace.”
Peace is a laudable goal. But it is just that – a goal. It is not an end at any cost.
It makes no sense to me that the United States provides Arab countries hostile to Israel with $12 billion in annual financial and military aid. Many of the weapons that Israel would face in a Middle Eastern conflict would have come directly from our government. I find this appalling. In the Senate, I would strive to eliminate all aid to countries that threaten Israel.
Finally, Iran has become increasingly bellicose towards Israel. Thankfully, Israel has one of the bravest, most elite military forces in the world. I would never vote to prevent Israel from taking any military action her leaders felt necessary to end any Iranian threat.
Just as the United States would not follow the will of another country in the face of our national security, we shall not limit the options of Israel in this area.
Finally, I believe the United States should increase the pressure on Iran. I would mandate that all publicly managed investment funds divest from Iran immediately.
We should not be subsidizing any company that does business with Iran, and we should not allow U.S. companies or those with funds from U.S. taxpayers to enrich Iran through its national energy program. I would fight to end all subsides to American corporations that do business with Iran, including so-called renewable energy companies that work through Brazil to provide support to Iran and empower its dictators dangerous nuclear saber rattling.
You will recall that Sarah Palin has been criticized in many Jewish quarters (including by me) because her PAC has contributed more money to Rand Paul than to anyone else.
Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Rand Paul has always troubled me.
Newsreal asks Palin to Re-Think That Rand Paul (Anti-Israel, Pro-Kokesh) Endorsement!.
Newsreal explores the meaning of a statement Rand Paul recently gave AIPAC in which he basically says he won’t tell Israel what to do and will vocally support her right of self defense. What is left unsaid is whether he will come to Israel’s aid if she is in trouble or whether he will resupply Israel in times of war. We also know that he is against intervention which means that Israel would be on her own.
On the one hand it is great that he wouldn’t push us around but he also wouldn’t help us if we needed it.
Contrary to Rand Paul, Palin believes that the US and Israel are allies and that the US must support her allies.
Palin has said that she supports Paul because she likes his federalist policies. But what about his non-intervention policy.
Supporters of Israel and our War on Terror will be shocked to see the following video showing Rand Paul with anti-war activist Adam Kokesh in Paul’s clinic office, discussing their “movement” and their campaigns. Kokesh is a congressional candidate in New Mexico. He was one of two men who interrupted John McCain’s acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, holding up a sign that read “McCain Votes Against Vets,” and punctuating the nominee’s expression of gratitude to George Bush for his post 9-11 defense of the country with disruptive shouting.
Kokesh organized a rally during which held up shoes, promising to “shoe Bush out of office,” and expressed his support of the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoe at President Bush as a sign of disrespect. At another rally during which participants carried upside down U.S. flags, Kokesh called for the impeachment of George Bush and Dick Cheney. At a “9-11 Truth” rally, Kokesh encouraged troops to cease their service to the country.
Why does it matter if Rand Paul is Israel’s ally? Because seven million Israeli citizens will be murdered by their Islamic enemies if we withdraw our financial and military support. To continue to live, the people of Israel do not need our “well-wishing” and “benign example,” but concrete support. If we elect enough Rand Pauls and Adam Kokeshes, Israel’s extinction will be assured. Yes, Rand will vote to cut off aid to Israel’s enemies, but also aid to Israel.
Walter Block of the Mises Institute authored an open letter to Jews arguing that foreign aid was bad for Israel and that under Ron Paul, the US would no longer try to control Israel's foreign policy. And promoted Jews for Ron Paul, an organization that turned out to be a fraud. More curiously, Block claimed that Ron Paul might actually triple foreign aid to Israel's enemies, which would destroy them.
But the first problem with the Pauls is not Israel. It's America. The problem is that they support Islamic terrorists because they've identified with the entire worldview of the far left and far right, which claims that the US government is run by a vast conspiracy, and that Muslim terrorists are just blowback as a result of our foreign policy. Which is a fancy way of saying that they believe that if they can overthrow the "American Empire", everything with Islam will be hunky dory.
Rand Paul has spoken in those terms before on the Alex Jones show. Like his father, he identifies more with Al Queda and Iran, than with the US.
While some of Ron Paul's Jewish supporters tried to claim that he would leave Israel, because he believes in respecting the sovereignty of other countries, in fact he attacked Israel for going after its kidnapped soldiers, something that was not taking place inside US borders. Essentially Paul was making the same argument then that Obama is making today, that Israel's actions affect the US, which gives him the right to demand that Israel stop defending itself.
...in favor of keeping terrorists locked up, when back in 09, it was a different story
...Furthermore as others are pointing out, Rand Paul has endorsed Adam Kokesh, which means getting in bed with Code Pink, a radical left wing org tied to Obama and Hamas of all things.
....Bubba has gone into great detail on Adam Kokesh in an open letter.
He is a fairly entrenched incumbent in a district drawn favorably for his party. That fact has helped U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) raise more than $650,000 in his bid for a third term in Congress. That amount includes $173,000 in political action committee contributions from interests ranging from organized labor to health insurers and trial lawyers.
Among individual donors, Ellison – the first Muslim elected to Congress – enjoys strong support from Muslim Americans throughout the country, campaign finance records show.
That's understandable. Tucked in among those contributions, however, are a handful of donors with a history of Muslim Brotherhood connections. For example, Ellison accepted $950 in contributions from Jamal Barzinji and another $1,000 from Hisham Al-Talib. And in late March, the Investigative Projec t on Terrorism has learned, Ellison attended a private fundraiser at the northern Virginia home of a man who led a group tied to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Barzinji and Al-Talib have served as vice presidents at the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a Northern Virginia think-tank federal authorities suspect was part of a terrorist financing network. In addition, a previous FBI investigation concluded that Barzinji and Al-Talib were among U.S. leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood when they came here as students.
The Brotherhood, which also is called the Ikhwan, is an Egyptian-based religious/political movement that seeks to establish Islamic law as "the basis controlling the affairs of state and society." Documents from an FBI investigation from the late 1980s show Barzinji included among "members and leaders of the IKHWAN." He was the secretary general for the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) at that time.
ISNA was founded by Muslim Brotherhood members in the United States, records from that FBI probe and other investigations show.
Investigative records and trial exhibits also show that the organizations donors Barzinji and Al-Talib have been involved in and have helped finance criminal organizations including the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development and a think tank that served as refuge for at least four members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad's governing board during the early 1990s.
The IIIT was part of a network of Islamic companies and charities long suspected of financing terrorism. It was a principal financier of the World and Islam Studies Enterprise (WISE), a think tank run by Palestinian Islamic Jihad board member Sami Al-Arian. Fellow PIJ board members Basheer Nafi and current Secretary General Ramadan Shallah worked at the WISE think tank in the early 1990s through visas Al-Arian helped secure.
In 1992, IIIT President Taha Jaber Al-Awani wrote to Al-Arian, saying he considers Al-Arian's think tank "an extension" of IIIT. "When we make a commitment to you or try to offer," Al-Awani wrote, "we do it for you as a group, regardless of the party or the façade you use the donation for."
According to an affidavit filed in connection with a 2002 search of the IIIT and related companies, the letter noted that others at IIIT, including Barzinji and Al-Talib, shared his assessment.
Ellison also received $1,000 from Esam Omeish, former president of the Muslim American Society (MAS), another group founded by Muslim Brotherhood members in the United States. The MAS Minnesota chapter paid Ellison's travel expenses for a 2008 pilgrimage to Mecca.
During a 2000 rally, Omeish praised Palestinians for "choosing the jihad way" to liberation.
Other donors include Turkish Islamist Merve Kavakci, and Asad Zaman, principal of the MAS-run Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy in Minneapolis, and Aly Abuzaakouk, former executive director of the American Muslim Council and a former IIIT publications director.
He also received money from two men who were officers in the American Muslim Council (AMC). Its founder and longtime executive director, Abdurrahman Alamoudi, pled guilty to illegal transactions with Libya that included a plot to kill a Saudi crown prince. Alamoudi was a Muslim Brotherhood member.
Ex-AMC President Mohammed Cheema has given Ellison $1,250 for the 2010 election. When President Bill Clinton invited novelist Salman Rushdie to the White House in 1993, Cheema wrote to the President saying the move showed "a disregard for the feelings of 7 million American Muslims." At the time, Rushdie faced a fatwa issued by the Ayatollah Khomeini for his novel, The Satanic Verses.
Another former AMC official, Yayha Basha, gave Ellison $500.
Ellison's campaign finance reports are surprisingly devoid of donations from executives at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), although this doesn't mean CAIR won't help him raise money. Executive Director Nihad Awad helped organize, and spoke at an intimate March fundraiser for Ellison at Omeish's Virginia home.
It isn't clear why Awad would play such a supportive role, yet not be listed as a donor to Ellison's campaign. It may be that, of all the Islamist groups mentioned, CAIR may be the most politically risky today.
CAIR appears to be the subject of a federal grand jury probe and has been frozen out by the FBI out of concerns over the organization's ties to Hamas. An FBI official explained the cut off in a letter last year. In February, a Department of Justice official spelled out the evidence in a Hamas-support trial that justified naming CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator.
Ellison remains close to CAIR nonetheless. He spoke at three CAIR fundraising dinners last year and took to the House floor to defend the organization after another member made critical statements about the group.
Last fall, Ellison berated a Muslim critic of Islamist organizations such as CAIR and MAS. Rather than taking on specific criticisms made by American Islamic Forum for Democracy founder Zuhdi Jasser, Ellison accused him of fomenting bigotry against his own people.
"I think people who want to engage in nothing less than Muslim-hating really love you a lot because you give them freedom to do that. You say, 'yeah, go get after them.'"Politicians of all stripes deny being influenced by those who contribute to their campaigns. Contributors, they often say, want nothing more than good government and expect nothing in exchange for their money. Perhaps. In his two terms, Ellison has demonstrated repeated support for Islamist organizations and their issues, even serving as an attack dog against an anti-Islamist Muslim who advocates for the separation between mosque and state.
These contributions are a small slice of Ellison's campaign war chest and hardly constitute the difference between a third term or defeat. By seeking them out, the congressman makes clear that he sees himself not as a representative of all American Muslims. Just like-minded Islamists.