German President Köhler resigns - Will it impact German EU policy? Germany would need to be able to use the military to defend its economic interestLabels: Germany» Köhler
Horst Köhler has resigned over a controversial interview he gave 9 days ago.
In the interview he said that an export-heavy economic power like Germany would need to be able to use the military to defend its economic interest, inter alia by keeping international trade routes free or by preventing regional destabilisation.
Because of the context these remarks are made, they have been interpreted as related to the German presence in Afghanistan (very unpopular in Germany) and may sound close to support of unconstitutional use of military forces (the German constitution only allows defensive use the army or actions within the UN framework).
perhaps Germany needs to find a better infrastructure then the UN for protection.
This was what the left wanted all along. Consider the following "forecast" of a perfect socialist future from H.G. Wells
And yet between 1940 and 2059, in little more than a century, this antiquated obdurate culture disappeared. It and its Zionist state, its kosher food, the Law and all the rest of its paraphernalia, were completely merged in the human community. The Jews were not suppressed; there was no extermination... but under the Tyranny there was never any specific persecution at all; yet they were educated out of their oddity and racial egotism in little more than three generations. Their attention was distracted from Moses and the Promise to Abraham and the delusion that God made his creation for them alone, and they were taught the truth about their race. The world is as full as ever it was of men and women of Semitic origin, but they belong no more to “Israel”.This is why left wing anti-zionism is anti-semitism. It isn't that they want to wipe out six million people of semitic ancestry. They just want Israel and Jews gone. They would rather do it bloodlessly, with no "extermination" or "specific persecution", but if the Jews don't cooperate, they still intend to fulfill their goals.
Chomsky regards himself as a supporter of Israel - lol The Angry Arab News Service وكالة أنباء العربي الغاضبLabels: Chomsky
Chomsky regards himself as a supporter of Israel and brags about meeting Walid Jumblat. (Thanks Raed)
PS It is an extremely disturbing interview (forget about the Israeli reporter here) but the reference to Israel "harming itself" as Chomsky put it, is telling enough. It is time that we learn that we dont have to stand and applaud any White Man who comes to our region with some criticisms of Israel, OK? I mean, imagine if a supporter of the struggle of blacks against Apartheid were to say: I count myself as a supporter of the Apartheid regime.
Gee... didn't Jimmy Carter already apologize for calling Israel an "Apartheid". Someone forgot to inform the nuts on the internet!
Now the Glenn Beck crowd has joined in.
"The traditional religious public has become haredi, the Sephardim have become more like the Ashkenazim in terms of their religious level, and the secular public, which was once traditional, is no longer. Each one moves in his own direction, and it is crucial that we create a situation in which we live Jewish and democratic values together."
Kadima's Livni seeks to bridge secular-religious divide
Opposition chairperson organizes conference on Jewish identity in democratic state, seeks to reduce secular hostility to religion
Kobi Nahshoni * Ynet
The Haredi press accused her of taking part in "incitements" against the haredi sector and being friendly with "local anti-Semites" but MK Tzipi Livni seeks reconciliation: Opposition Chairperson Tzipi Livni said to Ynet on Thursday she is worried that relevant criticism of ultra-Orthodox parties has recently degenerated into hatred for the haredi sector and religion.
"Judaism is after all the basis of the State's existence," she said. "The question of identity is not about what will happen in (haredi neighborhood) Bnei Brak, but how Tel Aviv will look during the religious festivals, and what will be taught in its schools."
Livni criticized the secular public and the growing distance between population groups in Israel. "Bnei Brak will remain Bnei Brak," she said. "The question is how a generation has grown up in other areas which is more Israeli but less attentive to the call of Judaism. It's our loss no less than that of the haredim."
Livni also noted that in recent years, "the traditional religious public has become haredi, the Sephardim have become more like the Ashkenazim in terms of their religious level, and the secular public, which was once traditional, is no longer. Each one moves in his own direction, and it is crucial that we create a situation in which we live Jewish and democratic values together."
On Thursday afternoon, Livni's party, Kadima, will hold a conference on the subject of Jewish identity in a democratic state, in collaboration with the Hartman Institute, in an attempt to neutralize fears, hostility and hate. The event will be held in the Knesset compound with the participation of representatives from a wide variety of groups including the founder of religious newspaper Yated Neeman, author Dov Elboim and the leader of the Reform movement.
'Jewish common denominator'
"The aim is to develop a public discussion on essence and identity," said Livni, who initiated the conference. "We all know what a democratic state is, but we don’t know what a Jewish state is."
Livni said that various separate groups had formed in Israel, living side by side, from the haredim who have taken advantage of the political system to determine what a Jewish state is and thus alienated the public, to the minorities, who are unsure whether this definition of the State harms their rights as citizens. Thus, she said, there is an urgent need to create a Jewish common denominator.
The conference will host rabbis, academics, directors of NGOs and other participants, who will discuss education for Judaism and Zionism, conversion, marriage and divorce, among other subjects. However, Livni does not aim to publish any decisions acceptable to all.
"People are trapped inside formulaic opinions without knowing what the other side thinks," she said. "I want first of all to open the discussion, just as I have done myself in recent years, with rabbis, for example. We need to see whether there are differences of opinion that can be bridged and how flexible each side is."
The opposition chairperson also noted that everything she says about politics makes the headlines, but what she thinks about the subject of religion in Israel is rarely heard. Livni contends that this is a critical issue which could cause the loss of the Zionist vision, because "the struggle for our existence is not just physical, but also about who we are."
This is also the reason why she has chosen this issue to open the series of conferences hosted by Kadima on a number of issues critical to Israeli society.
Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani-American who is accused of trying to detonate a car bomb in Times Square earlier this month, says he was radicalized by the Internet. Intelligence officials tell NPR that one of his inspirations is Sheik Abdullah Faisal, who recently set up shop in the Caribbean.
Radicalizing young men like Shahzad used to be a process that took months and generally required one-on-one recruiting, officials say. Now the radicalization process appears to happen at breakneck speed, just with the click of a mouse.
Linked To Plots Around The World
Faisal is one of the best known radical clerics on the Internet today. NPR set up an interview with Abdullah Faisal weeks ago. But when he arrived to speak to us in Montego Bay last week, he demanded money for the interview. NPR refused. So he declined to speak on tape.
Institute for Science and International Security March 14, 2001
South Africa is the only country to voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons. Many other states, such as South Korea, Taiwan, Argentina, and Brazil, abandoned their nuclear programs before they developed a weapon capability. However, South Africa's abandonment of its twenty- to thirty-year-old nuclear weapons program remains unique.
South Africa's first device was completed in 1979. A decade of weapons development followed, leading to plans to mate nuclear warheads with ballistic missiles. In 1990, President F. W. de Klerk terminated the program and in 1991 South Africa signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The IAEA then conducted an unprecedented verification of nuclear rollback. Although the IAEA was traditionally concerned only with the accuracy of a nation's declaration, after the agency's failure to detect Iraq's nuclear program the IAEA shifted its focus also to verifying the completeness of a nation's declaration of nuclear activities and facilities.
The official history of South Africa's nuclear weapons program as stated by South African government officials sidesteps some issues and is misleading on others. ISIS has interviewed South African nuclear scientists and government officials and collected material from South Africa and the IAEA to develop a more complete history of this program. The case of South Africa provides the only example of verification of nuclear rollback and highlights the extreme difficulty of verifying nuclear disarmament.
South Africa's nuclear program began during World War II with the discovery of major uranium deposits in the country. South Africa's first large-scale nuclear research and development project was initiated in 1959 under the auspices of the Atomic Energy Board (AEB). Although members of the former apartheid government claim that this project was not weapons-related, the African National Congress (ANC) believes that the ultimate goal of this early project was a nuclear weapon. The heart of the program was an indigenous nuclear power reactor fueled with natural uranium. Research on uranium enrichment was also commenced. A nuclear research center, including a US-provided research reactor, was established at Pelindaba. In 1967, South Africa abandoned the indigenous power reactor program while moving uranium enrichment to the pilot plant stage.
In 1967, South Africa combined its experience gained with the power reactor and uranium enrichment programs to launch a program to build peaceful nuclear explosives (PNEs). In 1970, South Africa announced the construction of a uranium enrichment plant, called the Y-Plant, at Valindaba, next to Pelindaba. Realizing that the large facility could not be hidden from outsiders, South Africa publicly announced the existence of the plant but kept secret the uranium enrichment technology and its plans to produce weapons-grade uranium. South Africa had tremendous problems getting the plant to work properly and the net effect was that output was only half as much as expected. Despite these problems, by the end of the 1980s, the plant had produced roughly 500 kilograms of uranium enriched to at least 80%.
In 1970, a committee within the AEB recommended that the government develop several types of PNEs including those based on gun-type and implosion-type designs (Type A) as well as boosted fission (Type A*) and thermonuclear designs (Type B). In 1971, the Minister of Mines approved development of the Type A devices. In 1973, theoretical work on Type B devices was approved and two years later approval was granted for the construction of facilities to produce the material needed for thermonuclear devices.
The AEB scientists chose to focus on the gun-type design and had completed theoretical work on such a design by 1973. In 1976, the first full scale test of the device, using natural uranium instead of enriched uranium, was conducted successfully. The next year, South Africa completed its first full-scale device (minus the highly enriched uranium). The huge device, 4.5 meters long and 3400 kilograms in weight, was suitable only for a static test. South Africa began its search for a test site in 1973 and by 1977 had completed two shafts in the Kalahari Desert. Preparations for a cold test were detected in August 1977 by the United States and Soviet Union forcing South Africa to halt its test preparation activities. Following this episode, AEB scientists miniaturized the design of the device so that it was only 2 meters long, weighed 750 kilograms and would be ready for testing at short notice.
By 1977, AEB also established nuclear weapon research and development and production facilities at Pelindaba. Around this time, South Africa's security environment had deteriorated with the introduction of Cuban forces into Angola and the imposition of a military embargo by the United Nations. In 1978, P.W. Botha became prime minister of South Africa and a nuclear strategy was developed. While the AEB felt that an underground test would be a sufficient deterrent, the military believed that a fully weaponized nuclear capability was needed to provide a credible deterrent. As a result, responsibility for the weaponization program was transferred to Armscor, South Africa's primary weapon development agency. By 1982, Armscor had built its first device, a relatively simple bomb. Subsequently it made extensive modifications to the AEB weapon design to meet the military's requirements for safety, security and reliability.
In 1985, the government capped the weapons program at seven gun-type devices and limited HEU production at the Y-Plant to that needed to meet this goal. Research on implosion, boosted fission and thermonuclear designs continued but work on plutonium-based weapons was halted. In addition, development of a ballistic missile to replace the aging Buccaneer bombers as a nuclear delivery system was continued. Armscor also received additional funds to build a new weapon production facility called Advena Central Laboratory.
South Africa's nuclear strategy, originally developed in the late 1970s, had three phases. Phase one consisted of perpetuating strategic uncertainty regarding South Africa's nuclear capabilities. If South Africa faced an overwhelming conventional military threat and the West was unwilling to intervene on its behalf, South Africa would implement phase two of the strategy. Under this phase, South Africa would covertly acknowledge the existence of its nuclear weapons to key Western powers in the hope of inducing their intervention. If this approach did not succeed, South Africa would move to phase three, the adoption of an overt deterrent posture, which included several options. South Africa would publicly acknowledge the existence of its nuclear stockpile, conduct an underground nuclear test, or detonate a nuclear explosion on the surface. South Africa calculated that the West's determination to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons would force them to place South Africa under their nuclear umbrella in the event of a crisis. The implementation of South Africa's nuclear strategy never progressed beyond phase one.
By 1989, South Africa had six devices in its arsenal, each containing 55 kilograms of HEU, and enough HEU for a seventh device. South Africa took several precautions to safeguard its weapon stockpile. All the devices were stored unassembled with the front and rear portions of the weapons stored in separate vaults. Four codes, including one held by the president, were required to assemble the two parts into a weapon. In addition, to prevent premature detonation of a device, the weapons would only arm once they reached a certain altitude on board their delivery aircraft. Armscor based its safeguards largely on American practices.
By late 1989, the departure of Cuban forces from Angola, the decline of the Soviet Union and the independence of Namibia, had significantly improved South Africa's security situation. President F.W. de Klerk, elected in September 1989, sought an end to the apartheid regime and South Africa's acceptance back into the international community. The nuclear weapons program was viewed an obstacle to these goals and orders were issued for the termination of the program. By the time South Africa joined the NPT in the summer of 1991 and IAEA inspections began later that year the program had been dismantled and its nuclear weapon manufacturing facilities had been decontaminated. Largely because of domestic and international pressure, de Klerk announced the existence of the former weapons program and began cooperating with IAEA efforts to verify the rollback of the program.
With access to South African records, the IAEA recalculated the Y-Plant's production on a day-to-day basis and arrived at a final estimate within about 5-10 kilograms of South Africa's declaration. The IAEA was able to verify the scope and timing of the South African nuclear weapons program and its subsequent dismantlement.
South Africa's success in developing nuclear weapons can be attributed to five elements. First, South Africa mastered the highly enriched uranium production process. Second, the nation had a defense industry which could produce nuclear delivery systems. Third, the program had good scientists and technicians. Fourth, the program had a good foreign procurement network. Fifth, the weapons' design was kept simple and low in cost. The international sanctions placed on South Africa in the 1970s slowed but did not stop its nuclear weapon program. In fact, the imposition of the sanctions in the 1970s may have hardened South Africa's determination to build nuclear weapons.
Rapporteur: Gregory Koblentz
back to seminar schedule, spring 2001
Greece sure has it tough these days.
On Wednesday, a horde of frogs caused a two-hour closure on one of Greece's major highways near the city of Thessaloniki. The city's traffic police chief, Giorgos Thanoglou, told the Associated Press that the "millions" of frogs were probably looking for food. Three accidents resulted, as drivers attempted to dodge the hungry hoppers. The AP writes that no human injuries were reported.
Ha'aretz) The Israeli Air Force is holding a joint exercise this week with the Greek Air Force in the skies above the Aegean Sea.
The exercise, named "MINOAS 2010", is supposed to continue through the weekend.
According to Greek media reports, 10 IAF planes are participating in the exercise – five F-15I Rams and five F16I Sufas. These are the newest aircraft in the IAF fleet and are able to carry out long-range attack missions. An IAF refueling tanker is also reported to be taking part in the drill.
The international headlines this morning are on the drama of an apparent public row between the Iranian and Russian leaders.
The fuse was lit in a speech by President Ahmadinejad in Kerman. As usual, he focused on the international rather than the domestic front, but this time he had a surprise:
But non-Western media really noticed the bangs when Moscow, through Presidential advisors, fought back. Foreign Policy specialist Sergei Prikhodko stated:Today it has become very difficult to explain [Russian President Dmitry] Medvedev’s behaviour to our people. Iranians do not understand whether they (the Russians) are our neighbour and friend standing by our side or are after other things.
Any unpredictability, any political extremism, lack of transparency or inconsistency in taking decisions that affect and concern the entire world community is unacceptable for us. It would be good if those who are now speaking in the name of the wise people of Iran … would remember this.
Russia has been playing a balancing game between Tehran and “Western” powers for months. Medvedev was one of the rare leaders who dared to appear in public with Ahmadinejad last summer, and the Russians maintained that projects such as the Bushehr nuclear power plant would be completed.
On the other hand, Medvedev — in contrast to his Foreign Ministry — has publicly signalled since last autumn that further sanctions can be considered if Iran did not shift its position over uranium enrichment. The Russians have delayed shipments and confirmation of contracts over missiles, and Bushehr’s opening date repeatedly slips.
Even last week, the Janus-faced policy of Russia continued. The sharp US response, with the introduction of a sanctions resolution to the UN Security Council, to the Iran-Brazil-Turkey declaration on uranium enrichment came after discussions with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Yet Moscow restated that Bushehr would come on-line in August, and the US press reported that Russian suppliers would continue to send missile components to Tehran.
So what happened for Ahmadinejad to disrupt the balance with his public statement? The obvious speculation is that Russia has refused to peel away from the sanctions move in the UN, but the truth is we don’t know. It’s unlikely that the warning from the Iran President is going to worry Moscow — what cards of pain can Tehran play against the Russians? — so Ahmadinejad’s statement appears as pique, anger, or even miscalculation.
For its part, the US has kept quiet, which seems the wise move. And China, the other “balancing” power in the UN Security Council, has also said nothing.
Most of the projectiles in the Syrian, Hizballah and Hamas arsenals are propelled by liquid fuel and therefore take 50 minutes to 1 hour to load and loose at assigned targets. During this time gap, they are vulnerable to air attack. As a bridging device, western intelligence sources believe the joint command in Damascus plans to attack Israel with synchronized missile fire from Iran and Syria during the time Israeli warplanes are hammering, say, Hizballah batteries in Lebanon.
The thinking in Tehran and Damascus is that the Israeli Air Force will find it hard to tackle three or four fronts simultaneously.
Tehran and Damascus are therefore building air shields around their missile bases and launching sites, for which purpose Assad asked Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to speed up the delivery of the advanced Russian Pantsir anti-aircraft missiles when the latter visited Damascus on May.
Medvedev promised to accede to this request.
debkafile's military sources recall that the same Russian Pantsir missiles were ineffective in preventing the September 2007 air strike, by which Israel destroyed the North Korean plutonium reactor financed by Tehran at Al-Azur in northern Syria.
It has come to my attention that certain American women, who consider themselves 'intellectuals,' are taking their marching orders on Twitter, from an idolized Islamic jihadist boss. I am working on proving that they are actually more organized than they appear. I am dogging them, and will continue to report updates here and on my twitter.
Ali Abunimah, known on Twitter as @avinunu, is a dangerous pro-Libyan American Palestinian who sometimes cloaks his Jew-Hatred in double-speak and goes around lecturing about the evils of Israel. He also likens Jews to Nazis with his hateful and dishonest anti-Israel propaganda. His tweets are deftly violent. At the very least, his hatred is palpable.
In the meantime, I am pleased to report that I see his American female disciples are running scared, deleting blogs and tweets; and even redoing conference tweets with quotation marks, after my criticism that they are American 'role models' that support Hezbolah and Hamas.
Their attempts to restructure their voices is laughable, as their loving devotion to Ali Abunimah is so obsequious and transparent, even a novice reader on twitter can see it. Here is one example:
@jilliancyork "I love when someone emails me to ask about a one-state solution. I always direct them to @avinunu's book."
Hasbro produces toys for Transformers, Star Wars, and Marvel.The 99, based on a group of ordinary people who discover superhuman powers and are influenced by messages from the Quran, will air a 26-episode series on the US cable channel The Hub, said Naif al Mutawa, the chairman and chief executive of Teshkeel Media.
“From day one it’s a for-profit company, but it’s a double bottom-line business,” Mr al Mutawasaid. “It’s to benefit both the socialbottom line as well as the financial.”
The 99 TV show is produced through a joint venture between Teshkeel and Endemol, the Dutch production company known for its series of reality television programs such as Big Brother and Deal or No Deal.
The Hub is a new cable network, a joint venture between Discovery Channel and the toy maker Hasbro, which will start broadcasting on October 10 into 60 million US homes. The 99 is one of six original programmes on the network.
Hamas supporter creates Muslim superheroes, the 99, to conquer the West:
Its mission: to instil old-fashioned Islamic values in Christian, Jewish and atheist children.A mission Barack Hussein Obama clearly supports, The heroes will get together with Obama
The book’s creator, a Hamas supporter who had sold 40,000 albums and 12 million stickers in four months, brushed off accusations that he was inciting hatred, saying: “There is no escaping the everyday reality of the intifada.”
by Baron BodisseyTwo weeks ago the Swedish artist Lars Vilks was physically attacked while giving a seminar at the University of Uppsala. His presentation featured a raunchy video that included suggestive images of gay men wearing Mohammed masks, and that was too much for the Muslims in the audience. One of them stormed the stage and head-butted Mr. Vilks, while the rest rose as one and chanted “Allahu Akhbar”. Needless to say, the remainder of the lecture was cancelled.
Several days later, to add insult to injury, Mr. Vilks’ house was vandalized and firebombed while he was away.
The University of Uppsala at first indicated that it was unlikely that Mr. Vilks’ seminar would be rescheduled on a later date, citing concerns about security. However, the university authorities have changed their minds, and now believe that adequate security for the event can be devised. Perhaps the university has borrowed some armored personnel carriers and Predator drones for the occasion.
'Palestinians' detonated a donkey laden with 200 kilos on the Gaza border on Tuesday. No people were hurt (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
The picture at the top is donkeys, not zebras. via israelmatzav.blogspot.com
Despite a relatively low student turnout compared to past years, the day was marked by what observers called an unusually large number of Jewish community members who carried Israeli flags and signs expressing solidarity with Israel and the Jewish students. Some said they represented groups such as the Orange County Chapter of the Zionist Organization of America, StandWithUs and the Orange County Task Force on Anti-Semitism. Others said they were not affiliated with any organization. StandWithUs distributed pamphlets and brought signs saying “Don’t bring hate to our community.
On Sunday, Hamas military forces captured 28-year-old Muhammad Swairki, a cook for President Mahmoud Abbas’s presidential guard, and executed him by throwing him to his death, with his hands and legs tied, from a 15-story apartment building in Gaza City. Later that night, Fatah military forces shot and captured Muhammad al-Ra’fati, a Hamas supporter and mosque preacher, and threw him from a Gaza City high-rise apartment building. On Monday, Hamas military forces attacked the home in Beit Lahiya of Jamal Abu al-Jadiyan, a senior Fatah official, captured him, and executed him on the street with multiple gunshots. On Tuesday, there were reports of additional killings of individuals not involved in hostilities.
(Israel National News) The Jewish Canine Legion in Israel has been active in helping Yitzchak Herskovitz access his property in Jerusalem after years of delays. Now that he finally has secured his legal rights to return to his property and Arab squatters have left, representatives of the organization remain on the land adjacent to his property, controlling the path that leads up to his house. The activists explain that they come to the house in order to make a Jewish presence felt until the police are willing do whatever is necessary to protect Herskovitz from the Arab squatters and others who, according to testimonies in the field, are threatening his life and the free access to his home. The Jewish Canine Legion is considering whether to set up a branch on the property not only to service Herskovitz's security needs but also to help train others on Jewish communities in southern Jerusalem and in the Gush Etzion Bloc. The unit reports that its dogs have prevented eight infiltrations this year into Elazar, in Gush Etzion, less than 10 minutes south of Jerusalem.
What in India’s history, and in Narain Kataria’s personal story, brought him to form an intellectual defense organization? For one thing, he has a master’s degree in history from an Indian university, so he knows the long-term problem.
He narrated to me that Muslim invaders had been attacking India for a couple of hundred years. Muslim rule started in the 10th century. It took the invaders about 300 years to conquer Afghanistan, once part of India.
The clever invaders discovered that Indian armies depended on their king. Muslim forces concentrated their archers against the Indian king. Once he fell, his army disintegrated. The Muslims then were able t
o corner and slay the Hindu soldiers individually. The widows committed suicide, rather than let the Muslims violate them.
We have elaborate literary and epigraphic evidence from the works of renowned Islamic Historians and inscriptions on numerous mosques all over India which glorify the barbarism and savagery perpetrated on Hindus by Islamic rulers. In addition to thousands of temples vandalized, looted and desecrated by Muslims, Islamists also destroyed three magnificent Hindu temples built in the name of Lord Shiva at Benaras, Lord Rama at Ayodhya and Lord Krishna at Mathura, and erected lofty mosques over them to humiliate Hindus. (Lord Shiva, Lord Rama and Lord Krishna are considered as an incarnation of God in Hindu pantheon.)
Example from the cited source: "The Amir marched out toward Lamghan [in Afghanistan but then part of India], which is a city celebrated for its great strength and abounding wealth. He conquered it and set fire to the places in its vicinity which were inhabited by infidels, and demolishing idol temples, he established Islam in them. He marched and captured other cities and killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters and gratifying the Musulmans." The sources elaborate upon the great wealth of India, before the Islamic conquest.
Kataria says, “Hindus want their temples back. The media does not report their sense of having been wronged, but instead, as wronging the Muslims.”
[Muslims likewise took over St. Sophia Church, one of Christianity’s primary cathedrals, in Constantinople. Muslim conquerors built a mosque over, and now also under, the Hebrew’s Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Then they claim that no other religion’s holy sites had been there.]
In 1947, the Hindus did not seek partition. The Muslims insisted on it by a 99% majority within their faith. Nevertheless, many stayed in India and doubled their population there. By contrast, Pakistan has been ousting non-Muslims. Thus the Muslims keep Pakistan exclusively Muslim but keep India not exclusively Hindu. “It is like having one’s cake and eating it, too.”
What India experienced, so has Israel. The first partition of Palestine led to an exclusively Arab state, Jordan, and another area, for a Jewish state but with a Muslim majority. The Muslims attempted to drive the Jews out of that other area, but in the effort, fled, leaving a Jewish majority.
Now the State Dept. and Arabs propose another partition into an exclusively Arab state under jihadist rule and a Jewish state having many restive Muslims. Restive, as when Arabs chant, “The Galilee is Arab!”
Kataria had lived in the one-third of India that the Muslims acquired during India’s partition at the same time that the UN recommended partition of the remaining area of the Palestine Mandate after Jordan was emancipated from it. Kataria is from the Sind region. He was among the 10 million Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists that the Muslims of Pakistan, in collusion with the Pakistani army, drove into India. He feels fortunate not to be among the 10 million driven into the ground. The world took no notice.
According to Kataria, Hindus comprised 20% of Pakistan’s population in 1947. Now it’s 2%. “The Hindus suffered the brunt of the violence during partition, because, Kataria says, “Hindus were not thinking in terms of enemies, whereas the Muslims were organized to kill.”
“Nearly two million Hindus are still held as slaves in southern Pakistan. In Bangladesh 20 million are missing.”
“And if we are honest we have to make a distinction between a democratic Israel that wants to live in peace and the terrorists who want Israel wiped out. The Israelis were told to give up land for peace; they gave up the land, but got no peace.” — J. D. Hayworth
The HMOs are independent and non-governmental, but highly regulated. Although membership in one of the funds is compulsory – no permanent resident can voluntarily opt out of the system – residents have free choice of which fund they wish to belong to (a change is allowed once every six months), making the HMOs compete for members. HMO members are typically directed by their HMO to a doctor or clinic associated with that HMO, but it is increasingly likely that any private clinic chosen arbitrarily will accept insurance payments from all four HMOs.
The government instituted universal health coverage in 1995. Prior to that time, there was one health fund that was operated by the country's monolithic labor union (best described as a combination of the AFL-CIO, the Mafia and the Teamsters), and there were three private health funds that were in considerably better financial shape. Now, all four funds are shaky financially but they are managing.So obviously it is a tough business to have Universal Healthcare, but Israel is a small society where it is easier to contain mistakes made by a big government. One of the accusations I have heard is that Israel can have healthcare because they spend American tax dollars. This isn't true. All the money that America pays goes towards the military... which is sad, but a realty.
To give an idea of how Efraim Karsh uses real facts to turn Arab propaganda that has become conventional wisdom on its head in his book Palestine Betrayed, here is what he writes about UN General Assembly Resolution 194, which the Arabs always insist provides for a "right of return":
While underscoring “the right of the Arab refugees to return to their homes in Jewish-controlled territory at the earliest possible date,” [Count Bernadotte's] report also considered the possibility of resettlement outside Palestine, with those who chose not to return being adequately compensated for their lost property. “It must not... be supposed that the establishment of the right of refugees to return to their former homes provides a solution to the problent,” the report read. "The vast majority of the refugees may no longer have homes to return to and their resettlement in the State of lsrael presents an economic and social problem of special complexity. Whether the refugees are resettled in the State of Israel or in one or other of the Arab States, a major question to he faced is that of placing them in an environment in which they can find employment and the means of livelihood. But in any case their unconditional right to make a free choice should be fully respected."
This principle was duly incorporated into General Assembly Resolution 194, passed on December 11 after a three month deliberation of the mediator's report, which placed repatriation on a par with resettlement elsewhere. It advocated, in its own words, that “the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should he permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date,” but also that efforts should be made to facilitate the “resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees."
In tacit acceptance of the Israeli position, the resolution did not treat the refugee problem as an isolated issue but as part of a comprehensive settlement between Israel and its Arab neighbors. All of its fifteen paragraphs deal with the facilitation of peace, including the single paragraph that alludes to refugees in general - not “Arab refugees" - in language that could as readily apply to the thousands of Jews driven from their homes in the prospective Arab state and Jerusalem by the invading Arab armies. Moreover, the resolution expressly stipulated that compensation for the property of those refugees choosing not to return “should he made good by the governments or the authorities responsible,” indicating that the Arab states, as well as Israel, were seen as instigators of the refugee problem. be it Arab or Jewish.
It was just these clauses in Resolution 194 that made it anathema to the Arabs, who opposed it vehemently and voted unanimously against it. Equating return and resettlement as possible solutions to the refugee problem; placing on the Arab states some of the burden for resolving it; and, above all, linking the resolution of this issue to Arab acquiescence in the existence of the state of Israel and the achievement of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peaoe were seen, correctly, as rather less than useful to Arab purposes.
During 1940's through 1950's nearly ALL the Jews had to flee from Arab countries to avoid persecution and pogroms. The number of Jewish refugees from Arab countries is estimated to be a million. This number is greater than the number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948, estimated as 343,000 (see Peters' book cited below).
Most of the Jewish refugees from Arab countries rapidly integrated into the modern society of Israel. This, despite the fact that Israel is a tiny country (about size of New Jersey) without any of the world's richest resources of petroleum in Arab countries. Today, the majority of the people in Israel are the descendants of Jews from Arab countries. (European Jews and their descendants constitute less than half the population of Israel).
Click here to kick his Muzzie ass: Kick Obama around
In the aftermath of World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder's Open Letter to President Obama, the Obama administration softened its public attitude toward Israel. Mr. Lauder's letter caused such an uproar in the United States and abroad that the White House felt it had to reaffirm its supposed support for Israel. Even the President got into the act. He wrote a letter to a Jewish leader from Chicago (an old chum) saying he is a strong and resolute friend of Israel. He did not write to Mr. Lauder or Ed Koch or Eli Wiesel because he was undoubtedly concerned that these critics would have responded to his meaningless platitudes.
President Obama's letter did not placate his Jewish critics but it did bring a lull in the exchange with the Jewish community. Now evidence is emerging that friends of Israel have no reason to believe that Obama has changed his anti-Israel, pro-Muslim policy.
Rumors that Obama was preparing to impose a solution on Israel that would result in a Palestinian State with modified 1967 borders began to emerge.
A think tank that is closely allied to the Obama administration and frequently gives valuable insights into the course being taken by the administration, published an interview titled "Borders as a Core Issue." The left-winger being interviewed talks about the ease of moving the mass majority of settlers because they live so close to the 1967 lines. He also refers to the every left wing "peace" initiative as a basis for Obama policy: He refers to the Geneva Initiative, The James Baker Institute's proposals, and Daniel Abraham Center proposal to emasculate the State of Israel. He makes no mention of Israel's stated proposals.
Also this week came news that Obama is threatening to convene an international conference to force the issue of a Palestinian State on Israel. Make no mistake, all these proposals require Israel to make security concessions that it will not be able to defend its people. They also target Jerusalem. One proposal acknowledges it will require a large international presence in the Old City of Jerusalem. Which means that the United Nations will control what goes on in the Old City!
In summation, Israel's enemies are on the march. Israel's friends must mobilize and engage the enemy.
Recently Shimon Peres suggested that Israelis and Jews worldwide use Facebook to fight anti-semitism in addition to inviting Mark Zuckerberg to Israel. I asked him about his thoughts on Facebook as a tool to fight anti-semitism and if Facebook would take proactive measures to fight against it. Mark believes that Facebook needs to focus on building useful communication tools and that the users can use these tools to connect and generate more worldly perspectives. As such Facebook does not need to be proactive about it. When asked about whether he will visit Israel next year, he said maybe. from: allfacebook.com via thejidf.org
The Internet is very shocked and upset that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was kind of weird and also creepy, back in college. Specifically, according to Business Insider, Zuckerberg used Facebook to get the email passwords of two Harvard Crimson reporters who were running a potentially damaging story about how Zuckerberg maybe stole ideas from these other two social network entrepreneurs. Business Insider is reporting that “he examined a log of failed logins to see if any of the Crimson members had ever entered an incorrect password into TheFacebook.com. If the cases in which they had entered failed logins, Mark tried to use them to access the Crimson members’ Harvard email accounts. He successfully accessed two of them.”
What he found was that the reporters thought he was kind of weird and creepy:
From: Elisabeth Susan Theodore To: Timothy John McGinn Subject: Re: Follow-upSo, in other words, some sleazy dude used Facebook to violate the privacy of some people he disliked. Has Facebook ever been used for any other purpose?
OK, he did seem very sleazy. And I thought that some of his answers to the questions were not very direct or open. I also thought that his reaction to the website was very very weird. But, even if it's true so what? It's an [redacted] thing not odd but it's not illegal, right?
Then there’s Obama downing America with Mexican President Philippe Calderon. He even stoops so low as to bow and shake Calderon’s family dog’s paw. Talk about an anti-American putz. Everyone knows that Mexico is a narco-terrorist state. The reported death toll from murders attributed to drug related violence since Calderon took office in 2006 exceeds over 15,000. This stat proves that Calderon and his country are losing their leverage to cartel bloodshed. How dare Obama persuade Mexico’s president to come to United States Congress to rail against America. His success is obviously dependent on illegal voters. Guess what makes this so jacked up? Mexico’s laws are nearly identical to that of the United States and Arizona. Mexico has a jobless rate that dwarfs ours. And Mexico is not experiencing the millions of illegals flooding into their borders like the US. So why couldn’t our POTUS stand up for Americans? After all, he took an oath to do so. But promises to the American people are minor in Obama’s world. Obama promised during his first year that he would make immigration reform a top priority. NOT.
When you engage in class and racial warfare, you assume that everyone else is too, and that you are only acting in self-defense.
People who don't believe in borders are totalitarian internationalists who are victimizing Latin Americans and encouraging a lower quality of life. The leaders do this because they are greedy and power hungry.
Now Washington D.C. has been put on notice that the states will act, even if Washington D.C. does not. And if the Federal government will not enforce the law, there are state governments that will. Immigration is not the end of it. The War on Terror remains an obvious area where the government has neglected its responsibilities in order to curry favor with Islam. And the next time an Islamic terrorist kills civilians in a more independent minded state, its residents may also decide that serious enforcement is needed.
Powerful people are against the measure because those who are against this will get the growing Hispanic support in our country. Sadly those people are using these Latin Americans and are guaranteeing these people a less sustainable life then they would if they stayed on the other side of the border.
via thejidf.orgIt's a shame when people make baseless comparisons:
Israel's water problems will be coming to an end in the coming two years as the worlds largest water desalination plant is opened, with another even larger plant on the way. Within a few years, the vast majority of Israel's water will be produced by the new desalination plants, leaving depleted sources such as the Sea of Galilee to return to their natural state. The desalination plants will be powered by the large quantities of natural gas discovered off of Israel's shores. A remarkable turn of events.
...there is another story here and that is about offshore resources, but Obama is too busy bowing to the Arabs to think about sustainable uses of energy. Perhaps we can run America on the wind caused by Obama?
Apparently the theory is that Cott might have been one of the anonymous commenters, and that this would bear on his sentencing — perhaps if he claims at sentencing that he’s sincerely contrite, and if his tweets are seen as undermining the claim of contrition.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett’s ... [s]pokesman Kevin Harley ... [said] the subpoena’s intent will be made clear when a former government aide, Brett Cott, is sentenced on Friday in connection with the Bonusgate scandal.
Cott is one of three people who were convicted of public-corruption charges in March after a trial that lasted nearly two months.
The Fox news story also says, “ACLU attorney Vic Walczak said Thursday he would file a motion to quash the subpoena if an agreement with the attorney general’s office can’t be worked out.” Presumably the agreement that the ACLU is contemplating is something like “Twitter will turn over the identity if it’s Cott, but not if it’s someone else, who’s not being sentenced, and whose identity is thus irrelevant to the sentencing.” Looking forward to seeing what happens.