The Iranian people, in a grass roots demonstration of their ire at a fake election, ought to be congratulated, honored and extolled for their bravery in the face of a fascist regime. Instead, what have the leaders of free people said and done? Virtually nothing - and have given the fascists a free pass to Go!
It is appalling to see our leaders genuflecting and carefully choosing their modest words in order to later have a dialog, so to speak as a reward for the murder of their subjugated citizens.
What has been the reply to the US president for asking to dialog with these cruel Ayatollahs and their Nazi cohorts? First, America must apologize for all the bad stuff we have done to the Iranians. Then, they will further make us grovel and beg. Only then will they talk together - maybe.
How does our dear brave president answer them? In Cairo, he was very clear. We don't want them to have the BOMB, but nuclear energy is OK. Just like nuclear energy was developed with India, Pakistan and North Korea.
The Jeanie is out. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and a few other places are on the way to develop "peaceful" nuclear energy. Just like nuclear energy was developed with India, Pakistan and North Korea.
Does anybody know what our fearless leader has done about North Korea nukes and missiles and Pakistan nukes?
We all know that the weak leader always picks on the little guy towards whom he has touted his devotion. So much so, that he has decided what is best for the security of his little buddy. More than that, his unpublished, but ever so obvious, agenda is to make sure that he appeases all the guys who want to destroy the little fellow. He really has demonstrated his strength when it comes to pushing around his little pal - Israel. One must wonder why he does not use similar tactics against America's enemies.
The most powerful leader in the world has been tested and has failed the test miserably. Now only one question remains: Is dismantling Israel too high a price for America to pay in order to attempt initiating friendly relations with Iran?
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Israeli Psychologist on Obama
This is a very frightening article. One that requires some deep thinking. I hope this guy is wrong. We shall see.
Dr. Sam Vaknin is an Israeli psychologist. Interesting view on our new president.
Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism.
Dr. Vaknin states "I must confess I was impressed by Sen.Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident - a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi "religious" impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is
quite ignorant on most important subjects."
Barack Obama is a narcissist.
Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist." Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple , the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao,Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom.. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.
"Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia , a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white)grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995".
One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention.
If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote.. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him. Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations.
The University of Chicago Law School provided for him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father.
Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience.. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.
A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii , and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power.
A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America . The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others.....They are simply self serving and selfish.
Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous.
Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites.
The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.
The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.
Obama will set the clock back decades... America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America , and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations.
It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.
Dr. Sam Vaknin is an Israeli psychologist. Interesting view on our new president.
Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism.
Dr. Vaknin states "I must confess I was impressed by Sen.Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident - a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi "religious" impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is
quite ignorant on most important subjects."
Barack Obama is a narcissist.
Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist." Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple , the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao,Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom.. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.
"Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia , a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white)grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995".
One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention.
If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote.. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him. Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations.
The University of Chicago Law School provided for him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father.
Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience.. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.
A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii , and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power.
A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America . The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others.....They are simply self serving and selfish.
Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous.
Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites.
The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.
The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.
Obama will set the clock back decades... America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America , and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations.
It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.
PIPES: IS HIS LOGIC VALID?
The Middle Eastern Cold War
by Daniel Pipes
Jerusalem Post
June 17, 2009
http://www.danielpipes.org/6406/middle-eastern-cold-war
A cold war is "the key to understanding the Middle East in the 21st century." So argue Yigal Carmon and three of his colleagues at the Middle East Media and Research Institute (MEMRI) in a recent study, "An Escalating Regional Cold War."
They have identified a major confrontation that the media has somehow missed – and which is the more important for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's just having been re-designated as president of Iran.
A cold war, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "a conflict over ideological differences carried on by methods short of sustained overt military action and usually without breaking off diplomatic relations." Note the three elements in this definition: ideological differences, no actual fighting, and not breaking off diplomatic relations.
The classic instance of a cold war, of course, involved the United States an
d the Soviet Union between 1945 and 1991, a long lasting and global standoff. The "Arab cold war" of 1958-70, shorter and more localized, offers a second notable instance. In that case, Gamal Abdel Nasser, an Egyptian revolutionary, tried to upend the region while the Saudis led the effort to maintain the status quo. Their conflict culminated in the Yemen War of 1962-70, a vicious conflict that ended only with the death of Abdel Nasser.
A new ideological division now splits the region, what I call the Middle Eastern cold war. Its dynamics help explain an increasingly hostile confrontation between two blocs.
The revolutionary bloc and its allies: Iran leads Syria, Qatar, Oman, and two organizations, Hezbollah and Hamas. Turkey serves as a very important auxiliary. Iraq sits in the wings. Paradoxically, several of these countries are themselves distinctly non-revolutionary.
The status-quo bloc: Saudi Arabia (again) leads, with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, and most Arabic-speaking states following, along with Fatah. Israel serves as a semi-auxiliary. Note that Egypt, which once led its own bloc, now co-leads one with Saudi Arabia, reflecting Cairo's diminished influence over the last half century.
Some states, such as Libya, sit on the sidelines.
The present cold war goes back to 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in Tehran and harbored grand ambitions to destabilize other states in the region to impose his brand of revolutionary Islam. Those ambitions waned after Khomeini's death in 1989 but roared back to life with Ahmadinejad's presidency in 2005 along with the building of weapons of mass destruction, widespread terrorism, engagement in Iraq, and the claim to Bahrain.
The Middle Eastern cold war has many significant manifestations; here are four of them.
(1) In 2006, when Hezbollah fought the Israel Defense Forces, several Arab states publicly condemned Hezbollah for its "unexpected, inappropriate and irresponsible acts." An Iranian newspaper editorial responded with an "eternal curse on the muftis of the Saudi court and of the pharaoh of Egypt."
(2) The Moroccan government in March 2009 announced that it had broken off diplomatic relations with Tehran on the grounds of "intolerable interference in the internal affairs of the kingdom," meaning Iranian efforts to convert Sunnis to the Shiite version of Islam.
(3) The Egyptian government arrested 49 Hezbollah agents in April, accusing them of destabilizing Egypt; Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah then confirmed that the group's leader worked for him.
(4) Close Turkish-Israeli ties have floundered as Ankara's increasingly overt Islamist leadership opposes Israeli government policies, deploys hostile language against the Jewish state, invites its enemies to Ankara, transfers Iranian arms to Hezbollah, and uses anti-Zionism to isolate the Turkish military.
By diverting passions away from the seemingly interminable Arab-Israeli conflict, the Middle Eastern cold war may appear to help reduce tensions. That, however, is not the case. However venomous relations between Fatah and Hamas may be, with each killing the other's operatives, they will in the end always join forces against Israel. Likewise, Washington will not find significant support in Saudi Arabia or any other members of its bloc vis-à-vis Iran. In the end, Muslim states shy from joining with non-Muslims against fellow Muslims.
Looking more broadly, the Middle Eastern cold war internationalizes once-local issues – such as the religious affiliation of Moroccans – imbuing them with Middle-East wide repercussions. Thus does this cold war add new flashpoints and greater volatility to what was already the world's most unstable region.
by Daniel Pipes
Jerusalem Post
June 17, 2009
http://www.danielpipes.org/6406/middle-eastern-cold-war
A cold war is "the key to understanding the Middle East in the 21st century." So argue Yigal Carmon and three of his colleagues at the Middle East Media and Research Institute (MEMRI) in a recent study, "An Escalating Regional Cold War."
They have identified a major confrontation that the media has somehow missed – and which is the more important for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's just having been re-designated as president of Iran.
A cold war, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "a conflict over ideological differences carried on by methods short of sustained overt military action and usually without breaking off diplomatic relations." Note the three elements in this definition: ideological differences, no actual fighting, and not breaking off diplomatic relations.
The classic instance of a cold war, of course, involved the United States an
d the Soviet Union between 1945 and 1991, a long lasting and global standoff. The "Arab cold war" of 1958-70, shorter and more localized, offers a second notable instance. In that case, Gamal Abdel Nasser, an Egyptian revolutionary, tried to upend the region while the Saudis led the effort to maintain the status quo. Their conflict culminated in the Yemen War of 1962-70, a vicious conflict that ended only with the death of Abdel Nasser.
A new ideological division now splits the region, what I call the Middle Eastern cold war. Its dynamics help explain an increasingly hostile confrontation between two blocs.
The revolutionary bloc and its allies: Iran leads Syria, Qatar, Oman, and two organizations, Hezbollah and Hamas. Turkey serves as a very important auxiliary. Iraq sits in the wings. Paradoxically, several of these countries are themselves distinctly non-revolutionary.
The status-quo bloc: Saudi Arabia (again) leads, with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, and most Arabic-speaking states following, along with Fatah. Israel serves as a semi-auxiliary. Note that Egypt, which once led its own bloc, now co-leads one with Saudi Arabia, reflecting Cairo's diminished influence over the last half century.
Some states, such as Libya, sit on the sidelines.
The present cold war goes back to 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in Tehran and harbored grand ambitions to destabilize other states in the region to impose his brand of revolutionary Islam. Those ambitions waned after Khomeini's death in 1989 but roared back to life with Ahmadinejad's presidency in 2005 along with the building of weapons of mass destruction, widespread terrorism, engagement in Iraq, and the claim to Bahrain.
The Middle Eastern cold war has many significant manifestations; here are four of them.
(1) In 2006, when Hezbollah fought the Israel Defense Forces, several Arab states publicly condemned Hezbollah for its "unexpected, inappropriate and irresponsible acts." An Iranian newspaper editorial responded with an "eternal curse on the muftis of the Saudi court and of the pharaoh of Egypt."
(2) The Moroccan government in March 2009 announced that it had broken off diplomatic relations with Tehran on the grounds of "intolerable interference in the internal affairs of the kingdom," meaning Iranian efforts to convert Sunnis to the Shiite version of Islam.
(3) The Egyptian government arrested 49 Hezbollah agents in April, accusing them of destabilizing Egypt; Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah then confirmed that the group's leader worked for him.
(4) Close Turkish-Israeli ties have floundered as Ankara's increasingly overt Islamist leadership opposes Israeli government policies, deploys hostile language against the Jewish state, invites its enemies to Ankara, transfers Iranian arms to Hezbollah, and uses anti-Zionism to isolate the Turkish military.
By diverting passions away from the seemingly interminable Arab-Israeli conflict, the Middle Eastern cold war may appear to help reduce tensions. That, however, is not the case. However venomous relations between Fatah and Hamas may be, with each killing the other's operatives, they will in the end always join forces against Israel. Likewise, Washington will not find significant support in Saudi Arabia or any other members of its bloc vis-à-vis Iran. In the end, Muslim states shy from joining with non-Muslims against fellow Muslims.
Looking more broadly, the Middle Eastern cold war internationalizes once-local issues – such as the religious affiliation of Moroccans – imbuing them with Middle-East wide repercussions. Thus does this cold war add new flashpoints and greater volatility to what was already the world's most unstable region.
Shades of Chavez: HATE AGAINST JEWS
Newsmax.com
Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews
By Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz
Our new president did not tell a virulent anti-Semite to travel to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington to kill Jews, but he is most certainly creating a climate of hate against us. It is no coincidence that we are witnessing this level of hatred toward Jews as President Barack Obama positions America against the Jewish state.
Just days ago Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt. It was his second trip in a short time to visit Muslim countries. He sent a clear message by not visiting Israel.
But this was code. In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in Israel, in America and everywhere.
And if his views are not vigorously opposed they will help create a danger as great as that posed by the Nazis to the Jewish people. Just last week, Obama told his worldwide audience more than 100 million people that the killing of six million Jews during the Holocaust was the equivalent of Israel’s actions in dealing with the Palestinians. This remark is incredible on its face, an insult to the six million Jews who died as a result of Hitler’s genocide and it is a form of revisionism that will bode evil for Jews for years to come.
While Obama acknowledged that “six million Jews were killed more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today” his discussion about the Holocaust was followed by this statement: “On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people Muslims and Christians have suffered in pursuit of a homeland.”
“On the other hand . . . ”?
Obama’s clever construct comparing the mass genocide of six million Jews to the Palestinian struggle will not be lost on the estimated 100 million Muslims who tuned into to hear him. Perhaps it was not lost on James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist identified as the alleged attacker Wednesday at the Holocaust Museum. He apparently felt that he could easily take retribution against the Jews for the atrocities Obama implies they are guilty of. At first blush Mr. Obama’s speech seemed rosy, optimistic one that espoused tolerance and understanding.
If you scratch the surface it is a dangerous document that history will view as a turning point for America and Israel one that will lead to dangerous times ahead for both Jews and believing Christians.
The immediate danger posed by Obama’s speech is in its incredible re-writing of the history of Jews, Christians and Muslims from Medieval times to the present.
Obama, continually throughout his speech, talks of Islam’s peaceful intent. And while there are certainly Koranic verses that support this interpretation, Islam has a long and bloody history of violence against fellow Muslims, Jews and Christians.
Has Obama not heard about the Muslim’s violent conquest of the Middle East, Spain and half of Western Europe? Was he never taught that the Crusades sought to turn back this Muslim onslaught that demanded subjugated populations convert or die?
In his almost hour-long speech, there is not a single word about Islam’s well known and checkered past.
Ironically, the American president offered plenty of references to what he sees are America’s evils, such as its “colonialism” and history of slavery. “For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation,” Obama told his audience, citing a litany of American shortcomings. He failed to mention that Arab Muslims were the greatest slave traders in the history of humanity. According to Obama, Israelis, too, are guilty of wrongdoing, especially when it comes to their supposed maltreatment of the Palestinians.
Isn’t it odd an American president would go to a foreign country and slander his own country and its long-time ally? At the same time he praises unconditionally a religion and culture that has a long history of being antithetical to the very values that have made America a great nation? Mr. Obama even has the unbelievable gall, when talking about the treatment of Muslim women, to condemn Western countries for attempting to stop Muslim women from using the full facial cover, or hijab. This is a symbol of Muslim subjugation of women.
Listen to what Obama said: “Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear.” And Obama not only ignores the gross subjugation of women in many Arab societies he does not mention even once the almost total religious intolerance throughout the Muslim world against Christians and Jews. In his speech, Obama’s only plea for Muslim women living in Muslim countries is that they should be afforded an education. How about a discussion of the beheading of Arab women for “crimes” such as adultery? How about the malicious treatment of women in Muslim countries who choose not to wear the hijab?
Obama insists that Islam has promoted tolerance and that in Islamic societies such ideals have flourished. Obama claimed that “as a student of history” he understands more than most the truth about “civilization's debt to Islam.” He added, “And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.” Does he not know that a Jew or Christian would be beheaded in Saudi Arabia for practicing their religion today, now, this minute?
Of course, Obama offers not one example of where religious freedom is truly tolerated in the Muslim world. Yet, he proudly told his audience that in every state of the union and throughout the U.S. there exist more than 1,200 mosques.
But why, Mr. President, is there no Christian Church or Jewish synagogue operating within the borders of Saudi Arabia? Not even one.
Why in many countries, including your host Egypt, Christian churches have suffered vicious and continual persecution? Why is a once vibrant Cairo Jewish community a home for the likes of Maimonides today practically extinct? Why, dear president, has the ancient Christian community in the West Bank and places like Bethlehem been almost completely wiped out by the modern Muslim onslaught? “On the other hand,” to quote you Mr. President, you avoided mentioning some other truths.
Let’s start with the Israeli Arabs who can claim one of the highest standards of living in the Arab world. Indeed, they have more rights than Arabs in any Muslim country, their religious freedom is completely protected, and they even vote in free elections. Tell me what Muslim country matches Israel’s record in protecting its minorities? Even Arabs in the West Bank, during the time of Israeli control, saw their standard of living rise dramatically. Today, Arabs there are among the best educated in the world, thanks to Israel.
In your revisionist view, Israel has acted to harm these people. But it was not Israel that could not abide by United Nations resolutions clearly setting borders for both the state of Israel and an entity that had never existed before named Palestine. You cleverly omitted any discussion of these facts, or the continual attacks against the state of Israel over six decades by its Muslim neighbors. Nor is it the Israelis who persecute from time to time the Coptic Christians of Egypt.
No, Mr. President, I do not accept your assertion that you are seeking religious tolerance or that you are seeking to protect Jews. I do not accept it because you are inventing a false history to fit your own agenda. Mr. President, I am deeply disturbed that you would offer such a distortion of truth in the hopes of creating a lasting peace. A lasting peace cannot be created out of lies, distortions and half truths.
You profess to be a Christian. But you seem more intent on protecting Muslims. In your speech you talked openly of your Muslim heritage, your admiration of their way of life, and so forth. You said in your speech that you have made one of your chief aims of your presidency repairing the image of Islam.
Why did you hide these views from the American public during the recent presidential campaign? Why, as president, did you fully bow to the Saudi king, who refuses to allow any religious freedom for any Christian or Jew?
You have made clear, by your words and assertions, that you are re-positioning the United States away from Israel, America’s lone democratic ally in the Mid-East.
You have made clear through your statements and those of your minions that Israel should, under no circumstances, prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
And yes, you have promised to retaliate against Iran if it ever attacks Israel with nuclear weapons.
But you know full well that if Iran succeeds in its admitted goal of “wiping the Jewish state off the map” and hits this tiny nation with nuclear warheads there will be no Israel for the U.S. to retaliate on behalf of. Some Jews may be naïve, but we are not stupid.
Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz is a member of the Reform movement of Judaism and serves as a chaplain for the State of New York. A former Navy and Marine Corps officer and chaplain, he has also served as deputy national chaplain for the Jewish War Veterans of the United States.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Editor's Notes:
* Milton Friedman's Shocking Obama Prophecy: Massive Inflation
* Get the Hat Worn By Our Troops, Just Pay Shipping!
* Statins no better than penny aspirin in stopping heart disease.
* Vitamin D deficiency linked to Alzheimer’s.
Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews
By Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz
Our new president did not tell a virulent anti-Semite to travel to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington to kill Jews, but he is most certainly creating a climate of hate against us. It is no coincidence that we are witnessing this level of hatred toward Jews as President Barack Obama positions America against the Jewish state.
Just days ago Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt. It was his second trip in a short time to visit Muslim countries. He sent a clear message by not visiting Israel.
But this was code. In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in Israel, in America and everywhere.
And if his views are not vigorously opposed they will help create a danger as great as that posed by the Nazis to the Jewish people. Just last week, Obama told his worldwide audience more than 100 million people that the killing of six million Jews during the Holocaust was the equivalent of Israel’s actions in dealing with the Palestinians. This remark is incredible on its face, an insult to the six million Jews who died as a result of Hitler’s genocide and it is a form of revisionism that will bode evil for Jews for years to come.
While Obama acknowledged that “six million Jews were killed more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today” his discussion about the Holocaust was followed by this statement: “On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people Muslims and Christians have suffered in pursuit of a homeland.”
“On the other hand . . . ”?
Obama’s clever construct comparing the mass genocide of six million Jews to the Palestinian struggle will not be lost on the estimated 100 million Muslims who tuned into to hear him. Perhaps it was not lost on James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist identified as the alleged attacker Wednesday at the Holocaust Museum. He apparently felt that he could easily take retribution against the Jews for the atrocities Obama implies they are guilty of. At first blush Mr. Obama’s speech seemed rosy, optimistic one that espoused tolerance and understanding.
If you scratch the surface it is a dangerous document that history will view as a turning point for America and Israel one that will lead to dangerous times ahead for both Jews and believing Christians.
The immediate danger posed by Obama’s speech is in its incredible re-writing of the history of Jews, Christians and Muslims from Medieval times to the present.
Obama, continually throughout his speech, talks of Islam’s peaceful intent. And while there are certainly Koranic verses that support this interpretation, Islam has a long and bloody history of violence against fellow Muslims, Jews and Christians.
Has Obama not heard about the Muslim’s violent conquest of the Middle East, Spain and half of Western Europe? Was he never taught that the Crusades sought to turn back this Muslim onslaught that demanded subjugated populations convert or die?
In his almost hour-long speech, there is not a single word about Islam’s well known and checkered past.
Ironically, the American president offered plenty of references to what he sees are America’s evils, such as its “colonialism” and history of slavery. “For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation,” Obama told his audience, citing a litany of American shortcomings. He failed to mention that Arab Muslims were the greatest slave traders in the history of humanity. According to Obama, Israelis, too, are guilty of wrongdoing, especially when it comes to their supposed maltreatment of the Palestinians.
Isn’t it odd an American president would go to a foreign country and slander his own country and its long-time ally? At the same time he praises unconditionally a religion and culture that has a long history of being antithetical to the very values that have made America a great nation? Mr. Obama even has the unbelievable gall, when talking about the treatment of Muslim women, to condemn Western countries for attempting to stop Muslim women from using the full facial cover, or hijab. This is a symbol of Muslim subjugation of women.
Listen to what Obama said: “Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear.” And Obama not only ignores the gross subjugation of women in many Arab societies he does not mention even once the almost total religious intolerance throughout the Muslim world against Christians and Jews. In his speech, Obama’s only plea for Muslim women living in Muslim countries is that they should be afforded an education. How about a discussion of the beheading of Arab women for “crimes” such as adultery? How about the malicious treatment of women in Muslim countries who choose not to wear the hijab?
Obama insists that Islam has promoted tolerance and that in Islamic societies such ideals have flourished. Obama claimed that “as a student of history” he understands more than most the truth about “civilization's debt to Islam.” He added, “And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.” Does he not know that a Jew or Christian would be beheaded in Saudi Arabia for practicing their religion today, now, this minute?
Of course, Obama offers not one example of where religious freedom is truly tolerated in the Muslim world. Yet, he proudly told his audience that in every state of the union and throughout the U.S. there exist more than 1,200 mosques.
But why, Mr. President, is there no Christian Church or Jewish synagogue operating within the borders of Saudi Arabia? Not even one.
Why in many countries, including your host Egypt, Christian churches have suffered vicious and continual persecution? Why is a once vibrant Cairo Jewish community a home for the likes of Maimonides today practically extinct? Why, dear president, has the ancient Christian community in the West Bank and places like Bethlehem been almost completely wiped out by the modern Muslim onslaught? “On the other hand,” to quote you Mr. President, you avoided mentioning some other truths.
Let’s start with the Israeli Arabs who can claim one of the highest standards of living in the Arab world. Indeed, they have more rights than Arabs in any Muslim country, their religious freedom is completely protected, and they even vote in free elections. Tell me what Muslim country matches Israel’s record in protecting its minorities? Even Arabs in the West Bank, during the time of Israeli control, saw their standard of living rise dramatically. Today, Arabs there are among the best educated in the world, thanks to Israel.
In your revisionist view, Israel has acted to harm these people. But it was not Israel that could not abide by United Nations resolutions clearly setting borders for both the state of Israel and an entity that had never existed before named Palestine. You cleverly omitted any discussion of these facts, or the continual attacks against the state of Israel over six decades by its Muslim neighbors. Nor is it the Israelis who persecute from time to time the Coptic Christians of Egypt.
No, Mr. President, I do not accept your assertion that you are seeking religious tolerance or that you are seeking to protect Jews. I do not accept it because you are inventing a false history to fit your own agenda. Mr. President, I am deeply disturbed that you would offer such a distortion of truth in the hopes of creating a lasting peace. A lasting peace cannot be created out of lies, distortions and half truths.
You profess to be a Christian. But you seem more intent on protecting Muslims. In your speech you talked openly of your Muslim heritage, your admiration of their way of life, and so forth. You said in your speech that you have made one of your chief aims of your presidency repairing the image of Islam.
Why did you hide these views from the American public during the recent presidential campaign? Why, as president, did you fully bow to the Saudi king, who refuses to allow any religious freedom for any Christian or Jew?
You have made clear, by your words and assertions, that you are re-positioning the United States away from Israel, America’s lone democratic ally in the Mid-East.
You have made clear through your statements and those of your minions that Israel should, under no circumstances, prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
And yes, you have promised to retaliate against Iran if it ever attacks Israel with nuclear weapons.
But you know full well that if Iran succeeds in its admitted goal of “wiping the Jewish state off the map” and hits this tiny nation with nuclear warheads there will be no Israel for the U.S. to retaliate on behalf of. Some Jews may be naïve, but we are not stupid.
Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz is a member of the Reform movement of Judaism and serves as a chaplain for the State of New York. A former Navy and Marine Corps officer and chaplain, he has also served as deputy national chaplain for the Jewish War Veterans of the United States.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Editor's Notes:
* Milton Friedman's Shocking Obama Prophecy: Massive Inflation
* Get the Hat Worn By Our Troops, Just Pay Shipping!
* Statins no better than penny aspirin in stopping heart disease.
* Vitamin D deficiency linked to Alzheimer’s.
Czechoslovakia and Israel are one
The Two State Solution is a Victory for the Proxy War against Israel
Posted: 24 Jun 2009 06:52 PM PDT BY SULTAN
When Hitler wanted to carve up Czechoslovakia he began by demanding the Sudetenland, inhabited by the Volksdeutsche, ethnic Germans living in Czechoslovakia. The world thought this was entirely reasonable and Czechoslovakia was forced to give in. Of course Hitler did not simply want the Sudetenland, anymore than he simply wanted the Rhineland. He was after a much vaster program of conquest.
By coining the term "Volksdeutsche" Hitler created an artificial identity for large numbers of Czechs, Poles and citizens of other Eastern European nations. He used that identity to create regional fifth columns that engaged in terrorism and then used them as justification to invade and seize other nations. Only by the time his ambitions reached Poland did Western Europe wake up to realize what their appeasement toward Nazi Germany had wrought.
By the time it was all over nearly 80 million were dead, a continent lay in ruins, Eastern Europe was in the hands of the Communists and Western Europe's Great Powers would never come into their own again.
"Palestine" like Volksdeutsche is an artificial identity created in order to maintain a fifth column and use them to conduct a proxy war against Israel, by the same Arab Muslim powers who had tried and fail to defeat Israel on the battlefield.
The tactic of course long predates and postdates Hitler. Alexander the Great made use of it in his conquests. The Russians used it only last year when they wanted to invade Georgia. But in the post-WW2 era it has most effectively been employed against Israel.
The absurdity of taking a Greco-Roman name for the region and trying to turn it into two things it never was, a nation and an ethnic identity, would have been inconceivable without heavy backing from both the Soviet Union and Western liberals. But by painting the genocidal urge of both Arab Marxists and Islamists as a drive to liberate "Palestine", the proxy war by Arab terrorists backed by Egypt, Jordan and Syria, and more recently by Iran, was successfully repackaged by an oppressed people to liberate a land that never existed.
As "Volksdeutsche" gave Hitler the right to carve up and eventually annex Czechoslovakia, "Palestine" has given the Muslim world and assorted leftists the right to carve up and destroy Israel under the pretext of aiding the "Palestinian People."
In 1937, Awni Abd al-Hadi told the Peel Commission stating, "Palestine is a term the Zionists invented.... Our country for centuries was part of Syria,"
As late as 1980 the Jordanian Prime Minister stated, "The Palestinians and Jordanians do not belong to different nationalities. They hold the same Jordanian passports, are Arabs and have the same Jordanian culture."
In 1977, Zuheir Mohsen, head of the second largest militia within the PLO and once considered a potential successor to Arafat, stated the premise of the proxy war quite frankly;
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.
Arafat himself expressed the same basic idea in his infamous U.N. speech in 1988, saying, "The State of Palestine is an Arab State; its people are an integral Part of the Arab nation."
Hamas' Foreign Minister Mahmoud Zahour repeated it in an Economist interview in 2008;
He certainly would not now “accept the reality” of Israel, as some of his senior colleagues have hinted. It may, instead, become “an eternal issue”, he says, looking ahead to a distant future when, “like your European Union”, the Arab nation will form one state across its historic lands, joining up with other Muslim nations such as Turkey. “We [Palestinians] were never an independent state in history,” he notes. “We were part of an Arab state and an Islamic state.”
That "Great Arab State" or "Great Islamic State", or Caliphate, has always been the endgame. Palestine is to the Caliphate, what the Sudetenland was to Hitler's Thousand Year Reich.
Israel is a stubborn little non-Arab non-Muslim state that stands in the way of the great dream of the Caliphate, a vast Muslim empire stretching across the Middle East into Turkey, Asia and even the heartland of Europe itself.
The fury directed at Israel from the Muslim world is in direction proportion to Israel's obstruction of this messianic vision of an Islamic Arab ruled Ummah stretching across the entire globe and fulfilling the vision of Mohammed.
It was never about "Palestinian rights", because not only is there no Palestinian people, but the refugee camps were themselves created by the Arab world as a first stage for the proxy war.
They began by alternately luring and badgering Arabs out of Israel during the War of Independence, for example;
"Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit....It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades."
The Economist, October 2, 1948
And naturally as renegades they would have been treated the same as the Jews, or perhaps even worse, during what was then seen as the "inevitable conquest" of Israel by the neighboring Arab states. At the very least that would mean the loss of property and land. At most it would mean outright massacre.
Once out they became refugees, kept in camps, and maintained as displaced persons, to serve as fodder for both terrorist recruitment and world outrage against Israel. As succinctly stated by UNRWA Director Ralph Galloway in 1958, "The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die."
After two lost wars, the "open sore" was transformed into a new Palestinian nation that had never existed but was being suppressed by Israel. Palestinian Terrorism became global, as part of a proxy war conducted by Arab states against Israel, itself part of a proxy war being conducted by the USSR against the West. With the fall of the USSR, the proxy war has shed its Arab Marxist colors in favor of Arab Islamist ones, replacing Fatah, once backed by Arab Socialist regimes in Egypt, Syria and Iraq, in favor of Hamas, backed by Islamist regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The Two State solution is the Sudetenland solution, carving up Israel and creating a sovereign and legally independent terrorist regime at war with Israel... inside Israel. With weapons flowing from around the Middle East and Pakistan through open borders, the real job of destroying Israel will finally begin.
Supporting the Two State solution means quite simply supporting the endgame of the proxy war against Israel. The solution has nothing to do with Palestinian rights or stabilizing the Middle East. There is no "tough love" in it, as Obama insists, or love of any kind. It is simply the final phase in the destruction of Israel, which itself is only one phase in the creation of a global Islamic empire.
Advocating the Two State solution means advocating genocide and ethnic cleansing. It means destroying the Middle East's only democracy to make way for a monstrosity that would be the worst of the Taliban writ large across the region and the globe. It means stoning, amputation and a thousand uncounted brutalities. And most of all it brings WWIII or a global clash of civilizations that much closer.
There are two kinds of people who support the Two State Solution. Those who know what they support and those who do not.
Posted: 24 Jun 2009 06:52 PM PDT BY SULTAN
When Hitler wanted to carve up Czechoslovakia he began by demanding the Sudetenland, inhabited by the Volksdeutsche, ethnic Germans living in Czechoslovakia. The world thought this was entirely reasonable and Czechoslovakia was forced to give in. Of course Hitler did not simply want the Sudetenland, anymore than he simply wanted the Rhineland. He was after a much vaster program of conquest.
By coining the term "Volksdeutsche" Hitler created an artificial identity for large numbers of Czechs, Poles and citizens of other Eastern European nations. He used that identity to create regional fifth columns that engaged in terrorism and then used them as justification to invade and seize other nations. Only by the time his ambitions reached Poland did Western Europe wake up to realize what their appeasement toward Nazi Germany had wrought.
By the time it was all over nearly 80 million were dead, a continent lay in ruins, Eastern Europe was in the hands of the Communists and Western Europe's Great Powers would never come into their own again.
"Palestine" like Volksdeutsche is an artificial identity created in order to maintain a fifth column and use them to conduct a proxy war against Israel, by the same Arab Muslim powers who had tried and fail to defeat Israel on the battlefield.
The tactic of course long predates and postdates Hitler. Alexander the Great made use of it in his conquests. The Russians used it only last year when they wanted to invade Georgia. But in the post-WW2 era it has most effectively been employed against Israel.
The absurdity of taking a Greco-Roman name for the region and trying to turn it into two things it never was, a nation and an ethnic identity, would have been inconceivable without heavy backing from both the Soviet Union and Western liberals. But by painting the genocidal urge of both Arab Marxists and Islamists as a drive to liberate "Palestine", the proxy war by Arab terrorists backed by Egypt, Jordan and Syria, and more recently by Iran, was successfully repackaged by an oppressed people to liberate a land that never existed.
As "Volksdeutsche" gave Hitler the right to carve up and eventually annex Czechoslovakia, "Palestine" has given the Muslim world and assorted leftists the right to carve up and destroy Israel under the pretext of aiding the "Palestinian People."
In 1937, Awni Abd al-Hadi told the Peel Commission stating, "Palestine is a term the Zionists invented.... Our country for centuries was part of Syria,"
As late as 1980 the Jordanian Prime Minister stated, "The Palestinians and Jordanians do not belong to different nationalities. They hold the same Jordanian passports, are Arabs and have the same Jordanian culture."
In 1977, Zuheir Mohsen, head of the second largest militia within the PLO and once considered a potential successor to Arafat, stated the premise of the proxy war quite frankly;
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.
Arafat himself expressed the same basic idea in his infamous U.N. speech in 1988, saying, "The State of Palestine is an Arab State; its people are an integral Part of the Arab nation."
Hamas' Foreign Minister Mahmoud Zahour repeated it in an Economist interview in 2008;
He certainly would not now “accept the reality” of Israel, as some of his senior colleagues have hinted. It may, instead, become “an eternal issue”, he says, looking ahead to a distant future when, “like your European Union”, the Arab nation will form one state across its historic lands, joining up with other Muslim nations such as Turkey. “We [Palestinians] were never an independent state in history,” he notes. “We were part of an Arab state and an Islamic state.”
That "Great Arab State" or "Great Islamic State", or Caliphate, has always been the endgame. Palestine is to the Caliphate, what the Sudetenland was to Hitler's Thousand Year Reich.
Israel is a stubborn little non-Arab non-Muslim state that stands in the way of the great dream of the Caliphate, a vast Muslim empire stretching across the Middle East into Turkey, Asia and even the heartland of Europe itself.
The fury directed at Israel from the Muslim world is in direction proportion to Israel's obstruction of this messianic vision of an Islamic Arab ruled Ummah stretching across the entire globe and fulfilling the vision of Mohammed.
It was never about "Palestinian rights", because not only is there no Palestinian people, but the refugee camps were themselves created by the Arab world as a first stage for the proxy war.
They began by alternately luring and badgering Arabs out of Israel during the War of Independence, for example;
"Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit....It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades."
The Economist, October 2, 1948
And naturally as renegades they would have been treated the same as the Jews, or perhaps even worse, during what was then seen as the "inevitable conquest" of Israel by the neighboring Arab states. At the very least that would mean the loss of property and land. At most it would mean outright massacre.
Once out they became refugees, kept in camps, and maintained as displaced persons, to serve as fodder for both terrorist recruitment and world outrage against Israel. As succinctly stated by UNRWA Director Ralph Galloway in 1958, "The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die."
After two lost wars, the "open sore" was transformed into a new Palestinian nation that had never existed but was being suppressed by Israel. Palestinian Terrorism became global, as part of a proxy war conducted by Arab states against Israel, itself part of a proxy war being conducted by the USSR against the West. With the fall of the USSR, the proxy war has shed its Arab Marxist colors in favor of Arab Islamist ones, replacing Fatah, once backed by Arab Socialist regimes in Egypt, Syria and Iraq, in favor of Hamas, backed by Islamist regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The Two State solution is the Sudetenland solution, carving up Israel and creating a sovereign and legally independent terrorist regime at war with Israel... inside Israel. With weapons flowing from around the Middle East and Pakistan through open borders, the real job of destroying Israel will finally begin.
Supporting the Two State solution means quite simply supporting the endgame of the proxy war against Israel. The solution has nothing to do with Palestinian rights or stabilizing the Middle East. There is no "tough love" in it, as Obama insists, or love of any kind. It is simply the final phase in the destruction of Israel, which itself is only one phase in the creation of a global Islamic empire.
Advocating the Two State solution means advocating genocide and ethnic cleansing. It means destroying the Middle East's only democracy to make way for a monstrosity that would be the worst of the Taliban writ large across the region and the globe. It means stoning, amputation and a thousand uncounted brutalities. And most of all it brings WWIII or a global clash of civilizations that much closer.
There are two kinds of people who support the Two State Solution. Those who know what they support and those who do not.
REMEMBER SDEROT!
By • Noam Bedein
Thu Jun 25 2009 23:05:01
While the world follows Iranian developments from the grandstands of YouTube, the people of southern Israel have had front row seats for some time now.
When Iran's protege, Hamas, staged a coup in Gaza that placed 1.4 million Palestinians under 'Hamastan' military rule, no one thought of how southern Israelis would be affected. Located less than one mile away from Sderot, Gaza's dramatic developments would come to affect everyone in the region.
Before Israel disengaged the Jewish communities from Gaza in August 2005, the Palestinian Authority had promised vast properties of some of these communities to Hamas. Four months later, in January 2006, Hamas won a stunning victory in the Palestinian Authority legislative elections, which resulted in the Mecca Accord of March 2007, which obligated the PA to share all foreign assistance with the Hamas organization.
All this placed Hamas in a strategic position from where it could launch attacks on Israel, even before the Hamas military coup.
Iranian Hamas terror tactics have dominated the lives of the people of Sderot. A town battered by sustained attacks for eight years, Sderot has become the only city to remain under continuous siege in the 21st century.
In 2008 alone, the Hamas-controlled Gaza regime fired over 3,300 rockets, mortars and Grads towards the Western Negev and southern Israel, 50 percent more than the previous year.
Five months after Operation Cast Lead, Hamas has fired over 215 rockets during the Hamas-Israel 'ceasefire.' Is anyone even keeping track of the number of failed ceasefires that Israel has held with Hamas in the past two years?
For Sderot residents, the knowledge that this has been Israel's third failed ceasefire with Hamas is not surprising.
In a June 17 appearance at the Knesset, Israel Security Agency director Yuval Diskin warned that "Hamas is continuing to increase its strength, manufacture longer-range rockets and smuggle rockets of a far superior quality,". In that light,every citizen of southern Israel knows that a massive escalation is around the corner, which will force more than one million Israelis in southern Israel into the seeming safety of protected rooms and bomb shelters.
Shoshana Swissa, a kindergarten teacher in Sderot recently told Sderot Media Center that ”Even today, in these relatively quiet days in Sderot, every single morning we exercise a drill for the 3-year-old children in our kindergarten. The staff teaches them how to run in 15 seconds towards the safe room when the Color Red alert siren sounds. ”
Turning the Gaza Strip into an Iranian military buffer zone
During Israel's second ‘ceasefire’ with Hamas, between June 2008- December 2008, Hamas did not waste any time building up its military capabilities. Israeli intelligence sources confirm that Hamas dug between 400 and 600 smuggling tunnels that connected Sinai and Gaza in order to “import” guns, missiles, explosives, money,and terrorists, along with oil, fuel, metal, cloths, electronics and even a lion for Gazan's zoo - earning the Hamas regime between 30-50 million dollars a month from the digging of the tunnels and the goods smuggled through.
The Iranian influence and involvement with the Gaza Strip peaked during the summer of 2008, when hundreds of Iranian missiles were smuggled in, to be fired massively only a few months later at southern Israelis during Israel's last military operation in Gaza.
Meanwhile, the Hamas regime trained tens of thousands of children and woman in Gaza during summer 2008, in anticipation of an Israeli counterattack to the Hamas reign of missiles.
Accepting Iran, accepting Hamas
Hamas today has become more acceptable as a resistance organization among political sectors worldwide. The most recent acceptance overture was made by the former US president Jimmy Carter, who visited Gaza this June and asked the European Union to take Hamas off the charts as a terrorist organization.
It should come as no surprise that a terrorist organization like Hamas, which has killed and wounded thousands of Israeli by suicide bombings and rocket fire, is now accepted as a legitmate governing body. If Iranian President, Ahmedinejad is invited to open a UN Conference on Human Rights and is then invited to meet with the Swiss President, then Western embrace of Hamas is just around the corner.
In the meantime, Sderot and southern Israel can only gear up for another round of rocket fire in the near future.
Thu Jun 25 2009 23:05:01
While the world follows Iranian developments from the grandstands of YouTube, the people of southern Israel have had front row seats for some time now.
When Iran's protege, Hamas, staged a coup in Gaza that placed 1.4 million Palestinians under 'Hamastan' military rule, no one thought of how southern Israelis would be affected. Located less than one mile away from Sderot, Gaza's dramatic developments would come to affect everyone in the region.
Before Israel disengaged the Jewish communities from Gaza in August 2005, the Palestinian Authority had promised vast properties of some of these communities to Hamas. Four months later, in January 2006, Hamas won a stunning victory in the Palestinian Authority legislative elections, which resulted in the Mecca Accord of March 2007, which obligated the PA to share all foreign assistance with the Hamas organization.
All this placed Hamas in a strategic position from where it could launch attacks on Israel, even before the Hamas military coup.
Iranian Hamas terror tactics have dominated the lives of the people of Sderot. A town battered by sustained attacks for eight years, Sderot has become the only city to remain under continuous siege in the 21st century.
In 2008 alone, the Hamas-controlled Gaza regime fired over 3,300 rockets, mortars and Grads towards the Western Negev and southern Israel, 50 percent more than the previous year.
Five months after Operation Cast Lead, Hamas has fired over 215 rockets during the Hamas-Israel 'ceasefire.' Is anyone even keeping track of the number of failed ceasefires that Israel has held with Hamas in the past two years?
For Sderot residents, the knowledge that this has been Israel's third failed ceasefire with Hamas is not surprising.
In a June 17 appearance at the Knesset, Israel Security Agency director Yuval Diskin warned that "Hamas is continuing to increase its strength, manufacture longer-range rockets and smuggle rockets of a far superior quality,". In that light,every citizen of southern Israel knows that a massive escalation is around the corner, which will force more than one million Israelis in southern Israel into the seeming safety of protected rooms and bomb shelters.
Shoshana Swissa, a kindergarten teacher in Sderot recently told Sderot Media Center that ”Even today, in these relatively quiet days in Sderot, every single morning we exercise a drill for the 3-year-old children in our kindergarten. The staff teaches them how to run in 15 seconds towards the safe room when the Color Red alert siren sounds. ”
Turning the Gaza Strip into an Iranian military buffer zone
During Israel's second ‘ceasefire’ with Hamas, between June 2008- December 2008, Hamas did not waste any time building up its military capabilities. Israeli intelligence sources confirm that Hamas dug between 400 and 600 smuggling tunnels that connected Sinai and Gaza in order to “import” guns, missiles, explosives, money,and terrorists, along with oil, fuel, metal, cloths, electronics and even a lion for Gazan's zoo - earning the Hamas regime between 30-50 million dollars a month from the digging of the tunnels and the goods smuggled through.
The Iranian influence and involvement with the Gaza Strip peaked during the summer of 2008, when hundreds of Iranian missiles were smuggled in, to be fired massively only a few months later at southern Israelis during Israel's last military operation in Gaza.
Meanwhile, the Hamas regime trained tens of thousands of children and woman in Gaza during summer 2008, in anticipation of an Israeli counterattack to the Hamas reign of missiles.
Accepting Iran, accepting Hamas
Hamas today has become more acceptable as a resistance organization among political sectors worldwide. The most recent acceptance overture was made by the former US president Jimmy Carter, who visited Gaza this June and asked the European Union to take Hamas off the charts as a terrorist organization.
It should come as no surprise that a terrorist organization like Hamas, which has killed and wounded thousands of Israeli by suicide bombings and rocket fire, is now accepted as a legitmate governing body. If Iranian President, Ahmedinejad is invited to open a UN Conference on Human Rights and is then invited to meet with the Swiss President, then Western embrace of Hamas is just around the corner.
In the meantime, Sderot and southern Israel can only gear up for another round of rocket fire in the near future.
WHERE IS AMERICA?
Iran: Desperately Seeking Yeltsin
Charles Krauthammer - Jun 26, 2009
Townhall.com
WASHINGTON -- Iran today is a revolution in search of its Yeltsin. Without leadership, demonstrators will take to the street only so many times to face tear gas, batons and bullets. They need a leader like Boris Yeltsin: a former establishment figure with newly revolutionary credentials and legitimacy, who stands on a tank and gives the opposition direction by calling for the unthinkable -- the abolition of the old political order.
Right now the Iranian revolution has no leader. As this is written, opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi has not appeared in public since June 18. And the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad regime has shown the requisite efficiency and ruthlessness at suppressing widespread unrest. Their brutality has been deployed intelligently. The key is to atomize the opposition. Start with the most sophisticated methods to block Internet and cell phone traffic, thanks to technology provided by Nokia Siemens Networks. Allow the more massive demonstrations to largely come and go -- avoiding Tiananmen-style wholesale bloodshed -- but disrupt the smaller ones with street-side violence and rooftop snipers, the perfect instrument of terror. Death instant and unseen, the kind that only the most reckless and courageous will brave.
Terror visited by invisible men. From rooftops by day. And by night, swift and sudden raids that pull students out of dormitories, the wounded out of hospitals, for beatings and disappearances.
For all our sentimental belief in the ultimate triumph of those on the "right side of history," nothing is inevitable. This second Iranian revolution is on the defensive, even in retreat. To recover, it needs mass, because every dictatorship fears the moment when it gives the order to the gunmen to shoot at the crowd. If they do (Tiananmen), the regime survives; if they don`t (Romania`s Ceausescu), the dictators die like dogs. The opposition needs a general strike and major rallies in the major cities -- but this time with someone who stands up and points out the road ahead.
Desperately seeking Yeltsin. Does this revolution have one? Or to put it another way, can Mousavi become Yeltsin?
President Obama`s worst misstep during the Iranian upheaval occurred early on when he publicly discounted the policy differences between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mousavi.
True, but that overlooked two extremely important points. First, while Mousavi himself was originally only a few inches to Ahmadinejad`s left on the political spectrum -- being hand-picked by the ruling establishment precisely for his ideological reliability -- Mousavi`s support was not restricted to those whose views matched his. He would have been the electoral choice of everyone to his left, a massive national constituency -- liberals, liberalizers, secularists, monarchists, radicals and visceral opponents of the entire regime -- that dwarfs those who shared his positions, as originally held.
Moreover, Mousavi`s positions have changed, just as he has. He is far different today from the Mousavi who began this electoral campaign.
Revolutions are dynamic, fluid. It is true that two months ago there was little difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. But that day is long gone. Revolutions outrun their origins. And they transform their leaders.
Mikhail Gorbachev and Yeltsin both began as orthodox party regulars. They subsequently evolved together into reformers. Then came the revolution. Gorbachev could not shake himself from the system. Yeltsin rose up and engineered its destruction.
In the 1980s, Mousavi was Ayatollah Khomeini`s prime minister, a brutal enforcer of orthodox Islamism. Twenty years later, he started out running for president advocating little more than cosmetic moderation. But then the revolutionary dynamic began: The millions who rallied to his cause -- millions far to his left -- began to radicalize him. The stolen election radicalized him even more. Finally, the bloody suppression of his followers led him to make statements just short of challenging the legitimacy of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the very foundations of the regime. The dynamic continues: The regime is preparing the basis for Mousavi`s indictment (for sedition), arrest, even possible execution. The prospect of hanging radicalizes further.
As Mousavi hovers between Gorbachev and Yeltsin, between reformer and revolutionary, between figurehead and leader, the revolution hangs in the balance. The regime may neutralize him by arrest or even murder. It may buy him off with offers of safety and a sinecure. He may well prefer to let this cup pass from his lips.
But choose he must, and choose quickly. This is his moment and it is fading rapidly. Unless Mousavi rises to it, or another rises in his place, Iran`s democratic uprising will end not as Russia 1991, but as China 1989.
Charles Krauthammer - Jun 26, 2009
Townhall.com
WASHINGTON -- Iran today is a revolution in search of its Yeltsin. Without leadership, demonstrators will take to the street only so many times to face tear gas, batons and bullets. They need a leader like Boris Yeltsin: a former establishment figure with newly revolutionary credentials and legitimacy, who stands on a tank and gives the opposition direction by calling for the unthinkable -- the abolition of the old political order.
Right now the Iranian revolution has no leader. As this is written, opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi has not appeared in public since June 18. And the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad regime has shown the requisite efficiency and ruthlessness at suppressing widespread unrest. Their brutality has been deployed intelligently. The key is to atomize the opposition. Start with the most sophisticated methods to block Internet and cell phone traffic, thanks to technology provided by Nokia Siemens Networks. Allow the more massive demonstrations to largely come and go -- avoiding Tiananmen-style wholesale bloodshed -- but disrupt the smaller ones with street-side violence and rooftop snipers, the perfect instrument of terror. Death instant and unseen, the kind that only the most reckless and courageous will brave.
Terror visited by invisible men. From rooftops by day. And by night, swift and sudden raids that pull students out of dormitories, the wounded out of hospitals, for beatings and disappearances.
For all our sentimental belief in the ultimate triumph of those on the "right side of history," nothing is inevitable. This second Iranian revolution is on the defensive, even in retreat. To recover, it needs mass, because every dictatorship fears the moment when it gives the order to the gunmen to shoot at the crowd. If they do (Tiananmen), the regime survives; if they don`t (Romania`s Ceausescu), the dictators die like dogs. The opposition needs a general strike and major rallies in the major cities -- but this time with someone who stands up and points out the road ahead.
Desperately seeking Yeltsin. Does this revolution have one? Or to put it another way, can Mousavi become Yeltsin?
President Obama`s worst misstep during the Iranian upheaval occurred early on when he publicly discounted the policy differences between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mousavi.
True, but that overlooked two extremely important points. First, while Mousavi himself was originally only a few inches to Ahmadinejad`s left on the political spectrum -- being hand-picked by the ruling establishment precisely for his ideological reliability -- Mousavi`s support was not restricted to those whose views matched his. He would have been the electoral choice of everyone to his left, a massive national constituency -- liberals, liberalizers, secularists, monarchists, radicals and visceral opponents of the entire regime -- that dwarfs those who shared his positions, as originally held.
Moreover, Mousavi`s positions have changed, just as he has. He is far different today from the Mousavi who began this electoral campaign.
Revolutions are dynamic, fluid. It is true that two months ago there was little difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. But that day is long gone. Revolutions outrun their origins. And they transform their leaders.
Mikhail Gorbachev and Yeltsin both began as orthodox party regulars. They subsequently evolved together into reformers. Then came the revolution. Gorbachev could not shake himself from the system. Yeltsin rose up and engineered its destruction.
In the 1980s, Mousavi was Ayatollah Khomeini`s prime minister, a brutal enforcer of orthodox Islamism. Twenty years later, he started out running for president advocating little more than cosmetic moderation. But then the revolutionary dynamic began: The millions who rallied to his cause -- millions far to his left -- began to radicalize him. The stolen election radicalized him even more. Finally, the bloody suppression of his followers led him to make statements just short of challenging the legitimacy of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the very foundations of the regime. The dynamic continues: The regime is preparing the basis for Mousavi`s indictment (for sedition), arrest, even possible execution. The prospect of hanging radicalizes further.
As Mousavi hovers between Gorbachev and Yeltsin, between reformer and revolutionary, between figurehead and leader, the revolution hangs in the balance. The regime may neutralize him by arrest or even murder. It may buy him off with offers of safety and a sinecure. He may well prefer to let this cup pass from his lips.
But choose he must, and choose quickly. This is his moment and it is fading rapidly. Unless Mousavi rises to it, or another rises in his place, Iran`s democratic uprising will end not as Russia 1991, but as China 1989.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
IMPORTANT SUMMARIES
Date: Thursday, June 25, 2009, 9:40 PM
READ THE REST AT: truthandjustice-online.com
Am Yisrael Chai
Seeking Justice through Truth
milw skyline-3
Issue: # 66
June 26, 2009
Newsletter of The Committee for Truth and Justice
Obama and Jews - #2
IN THIS ISSUE
Israelis and US Jews
The Obama Effect
Thuggery 101
Where is Everyone?
CTJ NEWSLETTER
Our girl, Caroline Glick, tells it like it is; again.
CTJ
Israelis, US Jews Differ Dramatically on Obama
Have American Jews abandoned Israel in favor of President Obama? This is a central question in the minds of Israelis today.
by Caroline Glick
In a poll of Israeli Jews conducted in mid-June by the Jerusalem Post, a mere 6 percent of respondents said they view Obama as pro-Israel. In stark contrast, a Gallup tracking poll in early May showed that 79 percent of American Jews support the president.
These numbers seem to tell us that U.S. Jews have indeed parted company with the Jewish state.
No American president has ever been viewed as similarly ill disposed toward Israel by Israelis. With only 6 percent seeing the administration as friendly, it is apparent that distrust of Obama is not a partisan issue in Israel. It spans the spectrum from far left to right, from ultra-Orthodox to ultra-secular. But with his 79-percent approval rating among U.S. Jews, it is clear the American Jewish community is quite sympathetically inclined toward Obama.
read more.
Our World: The Obama effect
By CAROLINE GLICK
"Could there be something to all the talk of an Obama effect, after all? A stealth effect, perhaps?"
So asked Helene Cooper, the New York Times' diplomatic correspondent in a news analysis of the massive anti-regime protests in Iran published in Sunday's Times. It took US President Barack Obama eight days to issue a clear statement of support for the millions of pro-freedom demonstrators throughout Iran risking their lives to oppose the tyranny of the mullahs.
And after eight days of vacillating and hedging his bets and so effectively supporting
Iranian dictator Ali Khamenei against the multitudes rallying in the streets, Obama's much awaited statement was not particularly forceful. He offered no American support of any kind for the protesters. Indeed, it is hard to say that in making his statement, the American president was speaking primarily as an American.
read more.
Thuggery 101
By Victor Davis Hanson
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | President Barack Obama came into office apparently believing that his non-traditional background, charisma and good intentions could placate dictators hostile to America and ease global tensions.
In these first six months, the new administration has made clear to Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega, Russia's Vladimir Putin and other strongmen like them that Barack Obama is not a mean-talking George Bush. A kinder, gentler United States has promised to push the "reset" button. In the interest of peace, an American president would finally be listening rather than lecturing, and willing to talk to authoritarian bullies without preconditions.
read more.
Where is Everyone?
Ma'ariv (Monday, June 22, 09) by Ben Caspit and Ben-Dror Yemini (opinion) -
"Tell us, where is everyone? Where did all the people who
demonstrated against Israel's brutality in Operation Cast Lead, in the
Second Lebanon War, in Operation Defensive Shield, or even in The
Hague, when we were dragged there unwillingly after daring to build a separation barrier between us and the suicide bombers, disappear to? We see demonstrations here and there, but these are mainly Iranian exiles. Europe, in principle, is peaceful and calm. So is the United States. Here and there a few dozens, here and there a few hundreds. Have they evaporated because it is Tehran and not here?
All the peace-loving and justice-loving Europeans, British professors in search of freedom and equality, the friends filling the newspapers, magazines and various academic journals with various demands for boycotting Israel, defaming Zionism and blaming us and it for all the ills and woes of the world-could it be that they have taken a long summer vacation?
Contact information for Senator Russ Feingold:
http://feingold.senate.gov/contact_opinion.html
Contact information for Senator Herb Kohl
http://kohl.senate.gov/
Committee for Truth and Justice | 6931 N. Beech Tree Drive | Glendale | WI | 53209
READ THE REST AT: truthandjustice-online.com
Am Yisrael Chai
Seeking Justice through Truth
milw skyline-3
Issue: # 66
June 26, 2009
Newsletter of The Committee for Truth and Justice
Obama and Jews - #2
IN THIS ISSUE
Israelis and US Jews
The Obama Effect
Thuggery 101
Where is Everyone?
CTJ NEWSLETTER
Our girl, Caroline Glick, tells it like it is; again.
CTJ
Israelis, US Jews Differ Dramatically on Obama
Have American Jews abandoned Israel in favor of President Obama? This is a central question in the minds of Israelis today.
by Caroline Glick
In a poll of Israeli Jews conducted in mid-June by the Jerusalem Post, a mere 6 percent of respondents said they view Obama as pro-Israel. In stark contrast, a Gallup tracking poll in early May showed that 79 percent of American Jews support the president.
These numbers seem to tell us that U.S. Jews have indeed parted company with the Jewish state.
No American president has ever been viewed as similarly ill disposed toward Israel by Israelis. With only 6 percent seeing the administration as friendly, it is apparent that distrust of Obama is not a partisan issue in Israel. It spans the spectrum from far left to right, from ultra-Orthodox to ultra-secular. But with his 79-percent approval rating among U.S. Jews, it is clear the American Jewish community is quite sympathetically inclined toward Obama.
read more.
Our World: The Obama effect
By CAROLINE GLICK
"Could there be something to all the talk of an Obama effect, after all? A stealth effect, perhaps?"
So asked Helene Cooper, the New York Times' diplomatic correspondent in a news analysis of the massive anti-regime protests in Iran published in Sunday's Times. It took US President Barack Obama eight days to issue a clear statement of support for the millions of pro-freedom demonstrators throughout Iran risking their lives to oppose the tyranny of the mullahs.
And after eight days of vacillating and hedging his bets and so effectively supporting
Iranian dictator Ali Khamenei against the multitudes rallying in the streets, Obama's much awaited statement was not particularly forceful. He offered no American support of any kind for the protesters. Indeed, it is hard to say that in making his statement, the American president was speaking primarily as an American.
read more.
Thuggery 101
By Victor Davis Hanson
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | President Barack Obama came into office apparently believing that his non-traditional background, charisma and good intentions could placate dictators hostile to America and ease global tensions.
In these first six months, the new administration has made clear to Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega, Russia's Vladimir Putin and other strongmen like them that Barack Obama is not a mean-talking George Bush. A kinder, gentler United States has promised to push the "reset" button. In the interest of peace, an American president would finally be listening rather than lecturing, and willing to talk to authoritarian bullies without preconditions.
read more.
Where is Everyone?
Ma'ariv (Monday, June 22, 09) by Ben Caspit and Ben-Dror Yemini (opinion) -
"Tell us, where is everyone? Where did all the people who
demonstrated against Israel's brutality in Operation Cast Lead, in the
Second Lebanon War, in Operation Defensive Shield, or even in The
Hague, when we were dragged there unwillingly after daring to build a separation barrier between us and the suicide bombers, disappear to? We see demonstrations here and there, but these are mainly Iranian exiles. Europe, in principle, is peaceful and calm. So is the United States. Here and there a few dozens, here and there a few hundreds. Have they evaporated because it is Tehran and not here?
All the peace-loving and justice-loving Europeans, British professors in search of freedom and equality, the friends filling the newspapers, magazines and various academic journals with various demands for boycotting Israel, defaming Zionism and blaming us and it for all the ills and woes of the world-could it be that they have taken a long summer vacation?
Contact information for Senator Russ Feingold:
http://feingold.senate.gov/contact_opinion.html
Contact information for Senator Herb Kohl
http://kohl.senate.gov/
Committee for Truth and Justice | 6931 N. Beech Tree Drive | Glendale | WI | 53209
Dennis Prager Audio
Files available for download:
File name Description Size
03 Prager H3_ Ultimate Issues Hour_ 12.mp3
Size: 16.4MB
Download: http://myaccount.dropsend.com/file/f262f8dc538fbd11
You can download these files up to 10 times each over the next 14 days.
Do you want to send large files, quickly and easily?
You can try DropSend for free :) We've already created an account for you,
just login at
https://myaccount.dropsend.com/login
Username: bx1935@sbcglobal.net
Password: zQuV0Mh8
By using this service, you agree to the terms at www.dropsend.com/termsconditions.php.
File name Description Size
03 Prager H3_ Ultimate Issues Hour_ 12.mp3
Size: 16.4MB
Download: http://myaccount.dropsend.com/file/f262f8dc538fbd11
You can download these files up to 10 times each over the next 14 days.
Do you want to send large files, quickly and easily?
You can try DropSend for free :) We've already created an account for you,
just login at
https://myaccount.dropsend.com/login
Username: bx1935@sbcglobal.net
Password: zQuV0Mh8
By using this service, you agree to the terms at www.dropsend.com/termsconditions.php.
WHICH EXPERTS AGREES WITH THIS?
Subject: Israeli Psychologist on Obama
This is a very frightening article. One that requires some deep thinking. I hope this guy is wrong. We shall see.
Dr. Sam Vaknin is an Israeli psychologist. Interesting view on our new president.
Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism.
Dr. Vaknin states "I must confess I was impressed by Sen.Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident - a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi "religious" impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is
quite ignorant on most important subjects."
Barack Obama is a narcissist.
Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist." Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple , the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao,Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom.. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.
"Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia , a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white)grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995".
One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention.
If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote.. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him. Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations.
The University of Chicago Law School provided for him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father.
Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience.. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.
A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii , and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power.
A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America . The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others.....They are simply self serving and selfish.
Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous.
Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites.
The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.
The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.
Obama will set the clock back decades... America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America , and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations.
It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.
This is a very frightening article. One that requires some deep thinking. I hope this guy is wrong. We shall see.
Dr. Sam Vaknin is an Israeli psychologist. Interesting view on our new president.
Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism.
Dr. Vaknin states "I must confess I was impressed by Sen.Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident - a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi "religious" impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is
quite ignorant on most important subjects."
Barack Obama is a narcissist.
Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist." Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple , the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao,Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom.. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.
"Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia , a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white)grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995".
One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention.
If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote.. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him. Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations.
The University of Chicago Law School provided for him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father.
Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience.. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.
A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii , and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power.
A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America . The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others.....They are simply self serving and selfish.
Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous.
Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites.
The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.
The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.
Obama will set the clock back decades... America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America , and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations.
It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
A PARIAH
Contact Esther Levens - elevens@israelunitycoalition.org - (913) 648-0022
The following article, written by Unity Coalition President and Founder, Esther Levens, first published in the current issue of the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle, June 19, 2009.
"Change" That Seems More Like "History Repeating Itself"
Kansas City, Missouri - June 22, 2009
There is renewed interest in Benjamin Netanyahu`s first term as Prime Minister of Israel during the late 1990s, as many seek indications of how he will react during his current term in office. The following are personal recollections of two significant events when I was honored to host the Prime Minister.
Similarly difficult circumstances prevailed in those days, and, then as now, he was under great pressure from the United States. However, as forceful as was the pressure from President Bill Clinton, Netanyahu is in an even more vulnerable position now, with the new U.S. administration determined to establish a two-state solution immediately.
During "Bibi’s" first term as prime minister, I was fortunate to have some “insider” knowledge of what was transpiring. It was fascinating how it evolved. It began when I was asked by my mentor and close friend, David Bar-Illan, the former editor of the Jerusalem Post who was then Director of Policy and Communication for Netanyahu, to feature the prime minister at an event hosted by the Unity Coalition for Israel on April 7, 1997, in Washington DC. It was attended by about 3,000 people, both Christians and Jews, who filled two ballrooms at the J.W. Marriott Hotel. The event was called “Israel at the Crossroads – How Can We Work Together?” Syndicated columnist Cal Thomas was master of ceremonies, and Netanyahu delivered an inspiring speech before the enthusiastic crowd.
As a result of the success of that event, David Bar-Ilan called me in January 1998 and asked that I host a similar event, this time at Washington’s Mayflower Hotel. He said he would provide the ballroom if I would organize it. Only this time it had to be accomplished in just nine days. Apparently, it was timed to take place just before Netanyahu was to meet with President Bill Clinton on January 22, 1998. Bar-Illan felt that a very supportive group would bring public attention to Israel’s concerns and give encouragement to the prime minister at a difficult time.
Netanyahu had not been invited to stay at Blair House, as heads of state normally were. Instead, he and his entourage occupied the l0th floor of the Mayflower. It appeared he was being snubbed by the White House.
At our Mayflower meeting, Netanyahu was greeted by 1,500 cheering admirers, who spontaneously rose to their feet and began to loudly chant, “Not one inch! Not one inch!” When Bibi spoke, he was so touched that he had tears in his eyes, saying, ”This must have been ordered by G-d.” It was, to say the least, a very emotional experience.
My friend Kay Arthur co-chaired the event with me. She is the author of over 100 books, including “Israel, My Beloved,” and founder of Precept Ministries that has study groups in more than 7,000 churches. She hosts “Precepts for Life,” a radio and television program that reaches a worldwide viewing audience of over 94 million. Also in attendance were many leaders of the Christian and Jewish communities, including the Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Dore Gold; activist Charles Jacobs; Lenny Ben-David, Counselor for Political Affairs, Embassy of Israel; Janet Parshall, a lawyer and daily talk show host for Salem Broadcasting Network; Elwood McQuaid and Bill Sutter, directors of Friends of Israel; Jerry Falwell, the noted Christian TV personality; Susan Michael, U.S. director of the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem; George Will, the syndicated columnist; JoAnn Magnuson, interfaith relations director for Bridges for Peace; and many others. The day after the Mayflower meeting, Prime Minister Netanyahu went to the White House to meet with President Clinton, definitely buoyed by the rousing reception he had just received.
One can only wonder if there wouldn’t be an even larger and more supportive crowd today to greet Netanyahu in the U.S., lending him encouragement and cheering him on. Fortunately, the sizable Christian and Jewish Zionist communities remain staunchly supportive. They share his view of maintaining a strong Israel as the only means of survival. As his country faces a nuclear threat from Iran and is surrounded by anti-American and anti-Israel Arab countries, mostly proponents of radical Islam, he will need all the support here in the U.S. that we can muster.
There were many memorable incidents surrounding the two events that we held. Those were interesting times when there was so much tension on the world scene. Who could predict that today conditions would be far worse!
Esther Levens of Prairie Village, Kan., founded the Unity Coalition for Israel in 1991. She remains its CEO. The coalition brings together Jewish and Christian groups in support of Israel; thus its original name: Voices United for Israel.
The following article, written by Unity Coalition President and Founder, Esther Levens, first published in the current issue of the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle, June 19, 2009.
"Change" That Seems More Like "History Repeating Itself"
Kansas City, Missouri - June 22, 2009
There is renewed interest in Benjamin Netanyahu`s first term as Prime Minister of Israel during the late 1990s, as many seek indications of how he will react during his current term in office. The following are personal recollections of two significant events when I was honored to host the Prime Minister.
Similarly difficult circumstances prevailed in those days, and, then as now, he was under great pressure from the United States. However, as forceful as was the pressure from President Bill Clinton, Netanyahu is in an even more vulnerable position now, with the new U.S. administration determined to establish a two-state solution immediately.
During "Bibi’s" first term as prime minister, I was fortunate to have some “insider” knowledge of what was transpiring. It was fascinating how it evolved. It began when I was asked by my mentor and close friend, David Bar-Illan, the former editor of the Jerusalem Post who was then Director of Policy and Communication for Netanyahu, to feature the prime minister at an event hosted by the Unity Coalition for Israel on April 7, 1997, in Washington DC. It was attended by about 3,000 people, both Christians and Jews, who filled two ballrooms at the J.W. Marriott Hotel. The event was called “Israel at the Crossroads – How Can We Work Together?” Syndicated columnist Cal Thomas was master of ceremonies, and Netanyahu delivered an inspiring speech before the enthusiastic crowd.
As a result of the success of that event, David Bar-Ilan called me in January 1998 and asked that I host a similar event, this time at Washington’s Mayflower Hotel. He said he would provide the ballroom if I would organize it. Only this time it had to be accomplished in just nine days. Apparently, it was timed to take place just before Netanyahu was to meet with President Bill Clinton on January 22, 1998. Bar-Illan felt that a very supportive group would bring public attention to Israel’s concerns and give encouragement to the prime minister at a difficult time.
Netanyahu had not been invited to stay at Blair House, as heads of state normally were. Instead, he and his entourage occupied the l0th floor of the Mayflower. It appeared he was being snubbed by the White House.
At our Mayflower meeting, Netanyahu was greeted by 1,500 cheering admirers, who spontaneously rose to their feet and began to loudly chant, “Not one inch! Not one inch!” When Bibi spoke, he was so touched that he had tears in his eyes, saying, ”This must have been ordered by G-d.” It was, to say the least, a very emotional experience.
My friend Kay Arthur co-chaired the event with me. She is the author of over 100 books, including “Israel, My Beloved,” and founder of Precept Ministries that has study groups in more than 7,000 churches. She hosts “Precepts for Life,” a radio and television program that reaches a worldwide viewing audience of over 94 million. Also in attendance were many leaders of the Christian and Jewish communities, including the Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Dore Gold; activist Charles Jacobs; Lenny Ben-David, Counselor for Political Affairs, Embassy of Israel; Janet Parshall, a lawyer and daily talk show host for Salem Broadcasting Network; Elwood McQuaid and Bill Sutter, directors of Friends of Israel; Jerry Falwell, the noted Christian TV personality; Susan Michael, U.S. director of the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem; George Will, the syndicated columnist; JoAnn Magnuson, interfaith relations director for Bridges for Peace; and many others. The day after the Mayflower meeting, Prime Minister Netanyahu went to the White House to meet with President Clinton, definitely buoyed by the rousing reception he had just received.
One can only wonder if there wouldn’t be an even larger and more supportive crowd today to greet Netanyahu in the U.S., lending him encouragement and cheering him on. Fortunately, the sizable Christian and Jewish Zionist communities remain staunchly supportive. They share his view of maintaining a strong Israel as the only means of survival. As his country faces a nuclear threat from Iran and is surrounded by anti-American and anti-Israel Arab countries, mostly proponents of radical Islam, he will need all the support here in the U.S. that we can muster.
There were many memorable incidents surrounding the two events that we held. Those were interesting times when there was so much tension on the world scene. Who could predict that today conditions would be far worse!
Esther Levens of Prairie Village, Kan., founded the Unity Coalition for Israel in 1991. She remains its CEO. The coalition brings together Jewish and Christian groups in support of Israel; thus its original name: Voices United for Israel.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
A PERSPECTIVE
BY: Jim Beer
Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 11:19 PM
My perspective is based on both actions and words.
That's because, in his Rose Garden speech, Bush said that the Palestinians needed leadership not compromised by terror, and then he embraced Mahmoud Abbas.
That doesn't mean everything he did was bad.
I agree with you about not meeting with Arafat, but what is more important is that he protected Arafat when Israel was ready to take him prisoner or kill him during the 2nd intifada.
With regard to Jenin, etc., his support of Israel was hardly vociferous - and he sent alot of mixed messages - calling for Israel to show restraint.
I think Bush actually denied Israel some bombs at the end of his term, as well as fly over rights over Iraq to bomb Iran
After routing Saddam in Iraq and having the jihadists back on their heels, he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory: the first thing he did was to pressure Israel into accepting the "road map."
And as I said, after 9/11 he gave into Colin Powell; trying to appease the Arabs at the expense of Israel by being the first President to call for a Palestinian state.
In his 2nd term, he abdicated his foreign policy leadership to Condi Rice and the State Department. Stood by while Rice pressured Israel into giving up the Philadelphia Corridor, compared Israel to Southern racists and Mahmoud Abbas to Martin Luther King, and praised the takeover of the Lebanese governement by Hezbollah, betraying his words in support of the Cedar Revolution.
Again tried to appease the Arabs at Israel's expense via the Annapolis process
He really set the bar low for Obama - making it easier for him to put the screws to Israel withour many people notcing much of a difference from Bush. I think Bush's heart was in the right place - he just didn't have the courage of his convictions after all was said and done.
That said, Obama is of course much worse. He's a disgrace. His timing is impeccable - on the heels of giving the mullahs a pass as they are crushing those calling out for freedom,he announces, on the same night, that he is going to restore the ambassador to both Syria and Venezuela. Apparently just one was not enough for him. And it looks like he's wanting to bring Hamas into the fold as well - he's told Syria that there's no problem in contuning to host Hamas.
Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 11:19 PM
My perspective is based on both actions and words.
That's because, in his Rose Garden speech, Bush said that the Palestinians needed leadership not compromised by terror, and then he embraced Mahmoud Abbas.
That doesn't mean everything he did was bad.
I agree with you about not meeting with Arafat, but what is more important is that he protected Arafat when Israel was ready to take him prisoner or kill him during the 2nd intifada.
With regard to Jenin, etc., his support of Israel was hardly vociferous - and he sent alot of mixed messages - calling for Israel to show restraint.
I think Bush actually denied Israel some bombs at the end of his term, as well as fly over rights over Iraq to bomb Iran
After routing Saddam in Iraq and having the jihadists back on their heels, he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory: the first thing he did was to pressure Israel into accepting the "road map."
And as I said, after 9/11 he gave into Colin Powell; trying to appease the Arabs at the expense of Israel by being the first President to call for a Palestinian state.
In his 2nd term, he abdicated his foreign policy leadership to Condi Rice and the State Department. Stood by while Rice pressured Israel into giving up the Philadelphia Corridor, compared Israel to Southern racists and Mahmoud Abbas to Martin Luther King, and praised the takeover of the Lebanese governement by Hezbollah, betraying his words in support of the Cedar Revolution.
Again tried to appease the Arabs at Israel's expense via the Annapolis process
He really set the bar low for Obama - making it easier for him to put the screws to Israel withour many people notcing much of a difference from Bush. I think Bush's heart was in the right place - he just didn't have the courage of his convictions after all was said and done.
That said, Obama is of course much worse. He's a disgrace. His timing is impeccable - on the heels of giving the mullahs a pass as they are crushing those calling out for freedom,he announces, on the same night, that he is going to restore the ambassador to both Syria and Venezuela. Apparently just one was not enough for him. And it looks like he's wanting to bring Hamas into the fold as well - he's told Syria that there's no problem in contuning to host Hamas.
THE NOT SO HIDDEN NEW AGENDA
BY DAVID SOLWAY
There is one issue that eclipses them all. Iran is racing to the nuclear finish line, determined to become what Middle East Terrorism expert Walid Phares has called a “Jihadist USSR.” It is developing solid fuel missiles capable not only of reaching American military bases in the region but of targeting major European cities. It is perfecting an EMP platform that constitutes a devastating menace to the United States. Disregarding the United Nations Charter, it has promised to annihilate a sovereign nation, with which it is not officially at war, by atomic holocaust. The potential for a planetary cataclysm is enormous and dwarfs by several orders of magnitude any other geopolitical concern in the world today. Yet Obama is intent on preventing Israel from constructing apartment units in East Jerusaelm while doing nothing to prevent Iran from constructing centrifuges in Natanz.
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and President Mubarak of Egypt, nominal allies of the United States, must be asking themselves why their distinguished counterpart gets so excited over these Israeli apartment annexes when Iran is about to launch a veritable game-changer, one that will alter the entire political complexion of the Middle East, putting Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and the Gulf Emirates at risk—and, indeed, the world along with them.
The President’s stance vis à vis Israel has little to do with America’s national interests or with an accurate reading of political and historical dynamics. It smacks much more of a private agenda on the part of a man who sat for twenty years worth of Sundays in a pew in Pastor Wright’s church, absorbing his anti-Jewish sermons and jeremiads; who counts among his personal acquaintances the director of Columbia University’s Middle East Institute and former PLO operative Rashid Khalidi, as well as many other Islamic and pro-Islamic supporters such as his campaign coordinators Mazen Asbahi and Minha Husaini and consultant Shakir Muhammad; and who has surrounded himself with demonstrably anti-Israeli advisors and colleagues, too numerous to name here.
The President also knows that dumping on Israel is a popular move in the current international climate and will not be faulted by his legionary supporters at home, in Europe and in the radical sectors of the Arab realm. As noted columnist and author Barry Rubin writes in the GLORIA center bulletin (June 3, 2009), “Israel is a soft target against which to play hardball.” But in focusing so relentlessly on Israel, Obama is taking the easy way out, for the fact of the matter is that he has absolutely no idea what to do about Iran—the very question that will ultimately define his Presidency—except to extend his open hand and, when that is ignored, to smooth down his hair.
When it comes to the principal dilemma confronting American foreign policy, Obama is utterly clueless. He is the wrong President for the wrong time. The undeniable truth is that he is totally out of his depth—or shallows. And that his main talent resides in the art of parrying instances of political awkwardness, diplomatic gaffes and visionary impotence by drawing on his undoubted charm and self-assurance, which his admirers interpret as presidential savvy. As for Israel, a country to which he is anyway ill-disposed, it serves Obama’s purposes wonderfully, allowing him to preserve his sense of aplomb and to keep his ostensible gravitas intact as the international situation continues to worsen.
Obama is not unintelligent nor is he overly impressionable—at least, not any longer—but he is, on the evidence, exceedingly vain and disturbingly arrogant. This is a man who relies on his urbanity and pizzazz to impose his will upon an awed electorate. A man who responds to an unwelcome query with the rejoinder, “I won” and who appears to regard himself as pretty well infallible, irrespective of what reality is telling him. It is this character trait which likely disables him from scrupulously assessing the real nature of the world’s preeminent conflict. It is this which may well account for his obvious reluctance to develop a robust and workable strategy on the Iranian file.
Obama is very good at stalking his smaller domestic adversaries but is extremely wary of anything that imperils the suave kinetics of his savoir faire. Obama is wholly cat, supple in his manifestations and graceful in his demeanor, but a cat who has faltered upon an issue before which he cannot admit his helplessness and lack of moral resolve, his failure of audacity. All he can do is divert attention from his incompetence and partisanship by seizing upon a lesser and comparatively nugatory matter—the natural growth of several previously accepted Israeli settlements. By concentrating on a few square kilometers in the Middle East, he is able to avoid facing the greater problem of the danger to his own nation and to the world as well, a problem he is simply not equipped to manage.
It is obvious that Obama has stumbled over Iran. It is equally obvious that he is intensely preoccupied with grooming his image.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Solway is the award-winning author of over twenty-five books of poetry, criticism, educational theory, and travel. He is a contributor to magazines as varied as the Atlantic, the Sewanee Review, Books in Canada, and the Partisan Review. His most recent book is The Big Lie: On Terror, Antisemitism, and Identity.
BY DAVID SOLWAY
There is one issue that eclipses them all. Iran is racing to the nuclear finish line, determined to become what Middle East Terrorism expert Walid Phares has called a “Jihadist USSR.” It is developing solid fuel missiles capable not only of reaching American military bases in the region but of targeting major European cities. It is perfecting an EMP platform that constitutes a devastating menace to the United States. Disregarding the United Nations Charter, it has promised to annihilate a sovereign nation, with which it is not officially at war, by atomic holocaust. The potential for a planetary cataclysm is enormous and dwarfs by several orders of magnitude any other geopolitical concern in the world today. Yet Obama is intent on preventing Israel from constructing apartment units in East Jerusaelm while doing nothing to prevent Iran from constructing centrifuges in Natanz.
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and President Mubarak of Egypt, nominal allies of the United States, must be asking themselves why their distinguished counterpart gets so excited over these Israeli apartment annexes when Iran is about to launch a veritable game-changer, one that will alter the entire political complexion of the Middle East, putting Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and the Gulf Emirates at risk—and, indeed, the world along with them.
The President’s stance vis à vis Israel has little to do with America’s national interests or with an accurate reading of political and historical dynamics. It smacks much more of a private agenda on the part of a man who sat for twenty years worth of Sundays in a pew in Pastor Wright’s church, absorbing his anti-Jewish sermons and jeremiads; who counts among his personal acquaintances the director of Columbia University’s Middle East Institute and former PLO operative Rashid Khalidi, as well as many other Islamic and pro-Islamic supporters such as his campaign coordinators Mazen Asbahi and Minha Husaini and consultant Shakir Muhammad; and who has surrounded himself with demonstrably anti-Israeli advisors and colleagues, too numerous to name here.
The President also knows that dumping on Israel is a popular move in the current international climate and will not be faulted by his legionary supporters at home, in Europe and in the radical sectors of the Arab realm. As noted columnist and author Barry Rubin writes in the GLORIA center bulletin (June 3, 2009), “Israel is a soft target against which to play hardball.” But in focusing so relentlessly on Israel, Obama is taking the easy way out, for the fact of the matter is that he has absolutely no idea what to do about Iran—the very question that will ultimately define his Presidency—except to extend his open hand and, when that is ignored, to smooth down his hair.
When it comes to the principal dilemma confronting American foreign policy, Obama is utterly clueless. He is the wrong President for the wrong time. The undeniable truth is that he is totally out of his depth—or shallows. And that his main talent resides in the art of parrying instances of political awkwardness, diplomatic gaffes and visionary impotence by drawing on his undoubted charm and self-assurance, which his admirers interpret as presidential savvy. As for Israel, a country to which he is anyway ill-disposed, it serves Obama’s purposes wonderfully, allowing him to preserve his sense of aplomb and to keep his ostensible gravitas intact as the international situation continues to worsen.
Obama is not unintelligent nor is he overly impressionable—at least, not any longer—but he is, on the evidence, exceedingly vain and disturbingly arrogant. This is a man who relies on his urbanity and pizzazz to impose his will upon an awed electorate. A man who responds to an unwelcome query with the rejoinder, “I won” and who appears to regard himself as pretty well infallible, irrespective of what reality is telling him. It is this character trait which likely disables him from scrupulously assessing the real nature of the world’s preeminent conflict. It is this which may well account for his obvious reluctance to develop a robust and workable strategy on the Iranian file.
Obama is very good at stalking his smaller domestic adversaries but is extremely wary of anything that imperils the suave kinetics of his savoir faire. Obama is wholly cat, supple in his manifestations and graceful in his demeanor, but a cat who has faltered upon an issue before which he cannot admit his helplessness and lack of moral resolve, his failure of audacity. All he can do is divert attention from his incompetence and partisanship by seizing upon a lesser and comparatively nugatory matter—the natural growth of several previously accepted Israeli settlements. By concentrating on a few square kilometers in the Middle East, he is able to avoid facing the greater problem of the danger to his own nation and to the world as well, a problem he is simply not equipped to manage.
It is obvious that Obama has stumbled over Iran. It is equally obvious that he is intensely preoccupied with grooming his image.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Solway is the award-winning author of over twenty-five books of poetry, criticism, educational theory, and travel. He is a contributor to magazines as varied as the Atlantic, the Sewanee Review, Books in Canada, and the Partisan Review. His most recent book is The Big Lie: On Terror, Antisemitism, and Identity.
From Cowboy to Wimpy
Silence Is Not Neutrality
Obama needs to support freedom in Iran
by Michael Rubin
National Review Online
June 23, 2009
http://www.meforum.org/2168/iran-silence-is-not-neutrality
Over the weekend, both conservative columnist George Will and former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan argued that conservative criticism of President Obama's rhetorical restraint amidst the Iranian protests was unwarranted.
"The president is being roundly criticized for insufficient rhetorical support for what's going on over there. It seems foolish criticism," Will said.
"To insist the American president, in the first days of the rebellion, insert the American government into the drama was shortsighted and mischievous," Noonan wrote. "The ayatollahs were only too eager to demonize the demonstrators as mindless lackeys of the Great Satan Cowboy Uncle Sam, or whatever they call us this week."
Both Will and Noonan are right that Obama should not endorse former Prime Minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi, but the president should certainly speak up for the principles of freedom, liberty, and free elections. He should point out that Afghans, Iraqis, Pakistanis, and Turks — almost all of Iran's neighbors — have freely chosen governments, and that this is a right that the Iranian people should also enjoy. Indeed, he can cite the Iranian legacy of elections going back to the constitutional revolution early last century. Right now, the Iranians are suffocating under a media blackout. In Tehran during the 1999 student uprising, I remember the frustration in the streets at the lackluster international response, especially as Iranian state television began broadcasting forced confessions.
If Obama were to get on Radio Farda or Voice of America Persian service and speak directly to the Iranian people, if he were to admit he was wrong to have implied that the supreme leader was their legitimate spokesman, that might have tremendous effect. Ilya Zaslavsky, a democratic-bloc leader in the Soviet Congress of People's Deputies, credited Ronald Reagan rather than Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev with originating the perestroika reforms.
If Obama is going to shirk his duty, then it is time for the Congress to speak up. In the early 1970s, as now, many in the foreign-policy establishment opposed any freedom-and-democracy agenda, but congressional activism helped overcome their resistance. Henry Kissinger opposed the 1974 Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which linked trade with the Soviet Union to that country's treatment of Jewish emigration, for fear that it could disrupt other diplomatic initiatives; but dissidents — not just Jewish ones — in the Soviet Union subsequently acknowledged how important that bill's passage was. We should all be thankful that Ukrainians did not heed Pres. George H. W. Bush's advice to work within the Soviet framework in his infamous "Chicken Kiev" speech.
Will the Iranian government try to taint the protestors as lackeys of the United States? Yes. But they will do this regardless of whether Obama speaks up. Former Carter aide Gary Sick and pro-engagement voices like Trita Parsi and James Dobbins condemned George W. Bush's democracy assistance, saying that it sparked the Islamic Republic's crackdown on civil society. The crackdown had begun years before, however, and had been foreshadowed by Hamid Reza Taraqi, the head of the hard-line Islamic Coalition party, before any U.S. initiative was announced. Too often, critics of White House policy exculpate the worst regimes in order to score political points.
The Islamic Republic's attacks on peaceful dissent are nothing new. The regime has always blamed Great Britain, the United States, Bahais, Zionists, and/or Jews for every ill that befalls the country. When the leadership claims God's mantle, it is hard to accept accountability for the failure of leadership; it is far easier to find straw men to blame.
Don't underestimate the Iranian people, however. The protestors are no longer supporting former Prime Minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi; they are chanting "Death to the Dictator" [Khamenei]. They are opposing the Islamic Republic. While conspiracy theories loom large in Iranian culture — indeed, Iranians poke fun at their conspiratorial nature in often-humorous ways — the Iranian people can separate the wheat from the chaff. Those inclined to believe Kayhan, the Islamic Republic News Agency, or the Fars News Agency will do so no matter what we do. Those disinclined will not swallow regime propaganda simplemindedly.
Obama promised to transform America's image in the world. Excising freedom and liberty from our brand is not the way to do it. Remaining silent is not neutral; it is casting a vote for the status quo, including the primacy of the supreme leader and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. It is time for Obama and Congress to speak loud and clear in defense of freedom.
Michael Rubin, a senior editor of the Middle East Quarterly, is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School.
/////////////////////////////////////////THE SULTAN///////////////////
Whether or not we are seeing Iran's Berlin Wall or only its Tienanmen Square, the Iranian regime will never be the same as it was. The resulting changes will almost certainly weaken the regime, if not entirely bring it down. Which is why it is entirely sensible to support Iran's June Revolution, though without forgetting that Mousavi is no saint and that Iran's reformers, like Khrushchev and Gorbachev, are not entirely distinguishable from its monsters.
While it might be easy to write off the protests and the protesters because of that, this would be shortsighted. The protesters are genuinely idealistic and they are fighting against an actual injustice and an unjust system. The aftermath of their protests may leave us with no better a situation than Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union, or China after Tienanmen Square, but nevertheless both present day Russia and the People's Republic of China are vastly preferable to what came before.
We personally cannot change what is going on in Iran now, but we can bear witness and speak out, for nothing so emboldens a tormentor as the silence of those watching his crimes.
FALSE SCIENCE
HEAT OF THE MOMENT
Scientists: Obama document is 'scare' tactic
Report cites imminent threats of 2-week winters, flooded roads
Posted: June 18, 2009
9:44 pm Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
The forecast from a new report by the Obama administration on global warming
warns North Carolina's beaches could be swallowed up by the sea, New England's long winters could last two weeks and Chicago? Watch out for deadly heat waves.
But scientists who have evaluated the warnings and forecasts says it is a "scare" report that has little relation to reality.
"This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA," said meteorologist Joe D'Aleo, the former chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting.
The scientist, who publishes the IceCap.US report, said the report "starts out DAY ONE being wrong on many of its claims. … They gave the administration the cover to push the unwise cap-and-tax agenda."
According to the Guardian, the original report was unveiled recently and cited "heavy downpours, rising sea levels, and blistering summer heat waves produced by man-made climate change."
It warned of possible sudden death for humanity, because the "projected rapid rate and large amount of climate change over this century will challenge the ability of society and natural systems to adapt."
The release of the report, "Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States," was orchestrated by a media consulting company and comes just as Congress is approaching a vote on plans for huge new taxes on energy.
Jane Lubchenco of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration told a press conference at the release the report is a "game-changer."
The report claims the average temperatures in the U.S. have risen by 1.5 degrees across five decades, and sea levels are up eight inches.
That has disrupted salmon, shifted butterflies and raised asthma rates, the report said.
And without immediate intervention, it said climate models suggest temperatures 11 degrees higher by the year 2099.
The result? Declining wheat and corn crops, food poisoning and the spread of diseases. Also, 2,400 miles of roads in the Gulf Coast could be swamped and electric grid failures are possible because of the demand for air conditioning.
The report was released by 30 NOAA scientists, environmental activists and media strategists, but according to a report on Climate Depot, amounts to scaremongering.
The Climate Depot is a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which "works to help people find better ways to provide for food, water, energy and other essential human services."
"There are a number of hurricane experts (including myself) that would disagree strongly…" said Stanley B. Goldenberg, an atmospheric scientist.
Geophysicist David Deming, associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma, described it as a "scare report."
"After following this subject now since the mid 1980s, I become more skeptical every year. I am now beginning to conclude that global warming simply does not exist," he wrote.
Citing possible deficiencies in the report, he said there has been no sea level rise for three years, tropical storm activity is at a 30-year low and a survey of weather stations – so far – reveals "an astonishing 69 percent" with possible "serious errors."
"Apparently the report will make up for having all the science stripped out by spending a lot of time on gaudy worst case scenarios," wrote a blogger at Climate Skeptic.
A forum participant on the site wrote, "They are not lying, they just choose the scariest numbers which appear to sell it best. … It's an embarrassment to me as an environmentalist, it’s a step backwards."
The 196-page document was given to Congress under a 1990 law requiring status reports on climate change. It claims heat-related deaths in Chicago will rise 10-fold by the end of the century and insect and plant diseases will gain new territory becuase of warmer winters.
It was only a week ago when Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, asked Congress in its new tax debate to consider the opinion of 31,478 scientists, including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s, who agree humans have nothing to do with any "global warming."
In a statement to the U.S. House, Paul said, "before voting on the 'cap-and-trade' legislation, my colleagues should consider the views expressed in the following petition that has been signed by 31,478 American scientists."
He was referring to the Petition Project, which actually was launched nearly 10 years ago when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.
But in the last few years, and especially because of the release of the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore, the campaign has been reinvigorated.
"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," project spokesman and founder Art Robinson has told WND.
Robinson, a research professor of chemistry, co-founded the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine with Linus Pauling in 1973, and later co-founded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.
Paul cited the petition results in his statement to Congress.
"Our energy policies must be based upon scientific truth – not fictional movies or self-interested international agendas," Paul said. "They should be based upon the accomplishments of technological free enterprise that have provided our modern civilization, including our energy industries. That free enterprise must not be hindered by bogus claims about imaginary disasters."
The petition states: "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
Robinson has warned that there are some very serious ramifications to assuming "global warming" results from mankind's actions and therefore those behaviors all need to be halted.
"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," he told WND.
WND also reported recently when Steven Chu, who was appointed by President Obama to be the U.S. Energy Secretary, said white paint is what's needed to fix global warming.
Chu told the London Times that by making paved surfaces and roofs lighter in color, the world would reduce carbon emissions by as much as parking all the cars in the world for 11 years.
He was speaking recently at the St. James' Palace Nobel Laureate Symposium, in which the Times partners for media events, when he described his simple and "completely benign" … "geo-engineering" plan.
He said building codes should require that flat roofed-buildings have their tops painted white. Visible sloped roofs could be painted "cool" colors. And roads could be made a lighter color, he suggested.
Related offers:
HYSTERIA: Exposing the secret agenda behind today's obsession with global warming
'Global Warming or Global Governance?' DVD reveals it's not about changing climate – it's about changing masters
The Sky's Not Falling! Why it's OK to chill on global warming
Read the book that started it all: Al Gore's 'Earth in the Balance'
Proof Al Gore full of hot air on 'global warming'
Get "Miraculous Messages: From Noah's Flood Until the End Times"
"GREEN WITH ENVY: Exposing radical environmentalists' assault on Western civilization"
You've been Amazon.conned about the rainforest!
Previous stories:
Congressman: Consider science in energy tax debate
'Smoking gun' leaves holes in CO2 debate
Look for your $10,000 energy tax bill
Greenhouse taxes to raise cost of 'everything'
EPA calls for new regs on greenhouse
Energy costs being bumped $2,000 per household
Al Gore ignores 'Earth Hour' Shocker! 'Global warming' just isn't happening
'Global warming' data called 'ancient astrology'
Obama's $300 billion-a-year climate-change plan
Report: Ice Age to blast Earth
Global warming dissenters dash scientific 'consensus'
2008: Coolest year of this century
Global warming debate heats up
Pelosi, Pickens plan to pick your pockets
Windmill farms: Just a bunch of hot air
U.N. to raise own thermostat 5 degrees
31,000 scientists reject 'global warming' agenda
Propaganda-driven kids attack think tank
Does 'climate change' mean 'changing data'?
Al Gore's global warming debunked – by kids!
Enviro rules prevent man from going green
Ted Turner predicts 'mass cannibalism' by 2040
Top hurricane scientist cools to global warming
Will hurricane 'expert' be sued for being wrong?
Baptists: No change on climate change
Scientists meet in NYC to challenge Gore, U.N.
Garbage in, garbage out: More bad warming data
Global warming shocker -- Who's minding the thermometers?
Weather Channel founder: Warming 'greatest scam in history'
Anti-global warming report a hoax
Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' required for city employees
Think tank: Withdraw Gore film's Oscar
Sun still main force in climate change
Study finds CO2 didn't end ice age
Kids global warming book 'deceives'
500 scientists refute global warming dangers
Sizzling study concludes: Global warming 'hot air'
Newsweek v. Newsweek on global warming denial
Laurie David climate book targets children
Fox News targeted for global warming 'stance'
Low temp blamed for small crowd at global warming fest
U.N. leader: Darfur slaughter triggered by global warming
Light bulb ban craze exceeds disposal plans
Gore refuses to take energy pledge
Harvard Ph.D ties illegals bill to global warming
Consumers in dark over risks of new light bulbs
Planet Earth banning common light bulbs
Gore plan would 'ban new cars and people'
Gore home's energy use: 20 times average
Retirees trade sailing dream for Al Gore war
U.S. climate researcher: We've got 10 years left
Pat Robertson converts - to 'global warming'
ABC News begs: Send us 'global warming' evidence
Protest decries 'global-warming cover-up'
Global warming? It's in the stars, says scientist
Environmentalists blast Gore: 'Take back toxic electronics'
Poll: 70% of evangelicals see global warming threat
Scientists slam Gore
Barbra Streisand: 'Global warming emergency'
Bush, 'global warming' to blame for hurricane?
Putin adviser says Kyoto 'smoke screen'
'Global warming' hype reaches fever pitch
Whites more to blame for 'global warming'?
Study: 'Global warming' claims overheated?
Gore decries 'global warming' in bitterly cold NYC
'Global-warming' experts ripped for heating planet
Global warming on Mars - without SUVs!
Scientists: Obama document is 'scare' tactic
Report cites imminent threats of 2-week winters, flooded roads
Posted: June 18, 2009
9:44 pm Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
The forecast from a new report by the Obama administration on global warming
warns North Carolina's beaches could be swallowed up by the sea, New England's long winters could last two weeks and Chicago? Watch out for deadly heat waves.
But scientists who have evaluated the warnings and forecasts says it is a "scare" report that has little relation to reality.
"This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA," said meteorologist Joe D'Aleo, the former chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting.
The scientist, who publishes the IceCap.US report, said the report "starts out DAY ONE being wrong on many of its claims. … They gave the administration the cover to push the unwise cap-and-tax agenda."
According to the Guardian, the original report was unveiled recently and cited "heavy downpours, rising sea levels, and blistering summer heat waves produced by man-made climate change."
It warned of possible sudden death for humanity, because the "projected rapid rate and large amount of climate change over this century will challenge the ability of society and natural systems to adapt."
The release of the report, "Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States," was orchestrated by a media consulting company and comes just as Congress is approaching a vote on plans for huge new taxes on energy.
Jane Lubchenco of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration told a press conference at the release the report is a "game-changer."
The report claims the average temperatures in the U.S. have risen by 1.5 degrees across five decades, and sea levels are up eight inches.
That has disrupted salmon, shifted butterflies and raised asthma rates, the report said.
And without immediate intervention, it said climate models suggest temperatures 11 degrees higher by the year 2099.
The result? Declining wheat and corn crops, food poisoning and the spread of diseases. Also, 2,400 miles of roads in the Gulf Coast could be swamped and electric grid failures are possible because of the demand for air conditioning.
The report was released by 30 NOAA scientists, environmental activists and media strategists, but according to a report on Climate Depot, amounts to scaremongering.
The Climate Depot is a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which "works to help people find better ways to provide for food, water, energy and other essential human services."
"There are a number of hurricane experts (including myself) that would disagree strongly…" said Stanley B. Goldenberg, an atmospheric scientist.
Geophysicist David Deming, associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma, described it as a "scare report."
"After following this subject now since the mid 1980s, I become more skeptical every year. I am now beginning to conclude that global warming simply does not exist," he wrote.
Citing possible deficiencies in the report, he said there has been no sea level rise for three years, tropical storm activity is at a 30-year low and a survey of weather stations – so far – reveals "an astonishing 69 percent" with possible "serious errors."
"Apparently the report will make up for having all the science stripped out by spending a lot of time on gaudy worst case scenarios," wrote a blogger at Climate Skeptic.
A forum participant on the site wrote, "They are not lying, they just choose the scariest numbers which appear to sell it best. … It's an embarrassment to me as an environmentalist, it’s a step backwards."
The 196-page document was given to Congress under a 1990 law requiring status reports on climate change. It claims heat-related deaths in Chicago will rise 10-fold by the end of the century and insect and plant diseases will gain new territory becuase of warmer winters.
It was only a week ago when Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, asked Congress in its new tax debate to consider the opinion of 31,478 scientists, including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s, who agree humans have nothing to do with any "global warming."
In a statement to the U.S. House, Paul said, "before voting on the 'cap-and-trade' legislation, my colleagues should consider the views expressed in the following petition that has been signed by 31,478 American scientists."
He was referring to the Petition Project, which actually was launched nearly 10 years ago when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.
But in the last few years, and especially because of the release of the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore, the campaign has been reinvigorated.
"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," project spokesman and founder Art Robinson has told WND.
Robinson, a research professor of chemistry, co-founded the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine with Linus Pauling in 1973, and later co-founded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.
Paul cited the petition results in his statement to Congress.
"Our energy policies must be based upon scientific truth – not fictional movies or self-interested international agendas," Paul said. "They should be based upon the accomplishments of technological free enterprise that have provided our modern civilization, including our energy industries. That free enterprise must not be hindered by bogus claims about imaginary disasters."
The petition states: "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
Robinson has warned that there are some very serious ramifications to assuming "global warming" results from mankind's actions and therefore those behaviors all need to be halted.
"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," he told WND.
WND also reported recently when Steven Chu, who was appointed by President Obama to be the U.S. Energy Secretary, said white paint is what's needed to fix global warming.
Chu told the London Times that by making paved surfaces and roofs lighter in color, the world would reduce carbon emissions by as much as parking all the cars in the world for 11 years.
He was speaking recently at the St. James' Palace Nobel Laureate Symposium, in which the Times partners for media events, when he described his simple and "completely benign" … "geo-engineering" plan.
He said building codes should require that flat roofed-buildings have their tops painted white. Visible sloped roofs could be painted "cool" colors. And roads could be made a lighter color, he suggested.
Related offers:
HYSTERIA: Exposing the secret agenda behind today's obsession with global warming
'Global Warming or Global Governance?' DVD reveals it's not about changing climate – it's about changing masters
The Sky's Not Falling! Why it's OK to chill on global warming
Read the book that started it all: Al Gore's 'Earth in the Balance'
Proof Al Gore full of hot air on 'global warming'
Get "Miraculous Messages: From Noah's Flood Until the End Times"
"GREEN WITH ENVY: Exposing radical environmentalists' assault on Western civilization"
You've been Amazon.conned about the rainforest!
Previous stories:
Congressman: Consider science in energy tax debate
'Smoking gun' leaves holes in CO2 debate
Look for your $10,000 energy tax bill
Greenhouse taxes to raise cost of 'everything'
EPA calls for new regs on greenhouse
Energy costs being bumped $2,000 per household
Al Gore ignores 'Earth Hour' Shocker! 'Global warming' just isn't happening
'Global warming' data called 'ancient astrology'
Obama's $300 billion-a-year climate-change plan
Report: Ice Age to blast Earth
Global warming dissenters dash scientific 'consensus'
2008: Coolest year of this century
Global warming debate heats up
Pelosi, Pickens plan to pick your pockets
Windmill farms: Just a bunch of hot air
U.N. to raise own thermostat 5 degrees
31,000 scientists reject 'global warming' agenda
Propaganda-driven kids attack think tank
Does 'climate change' mean 'changing data'?
Al Gore's global warming debunked – by kids!
Enviro rules prevent man from going green
Ted Turner predicts 'mass cannibalism' by 2040
Top hurricane scientist cools to global warming
Will hurricane 'expert' be sued for being wrong?
Baptists: No change on climate change
Scientists meet in NYC to challenge Gore, U.N.
Garbage in, garbage out: More bad warming data
Global warming shocker -- Who's minding the thermometers?
Weather Channel founder: Warming 'greatest scam in history'
Anti-global warming report a hoax
Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' required for city employees
Think tank: Withdraw Gore film's Oscar
Sun still main force in climate change
Study finds CO2 didn't end ice age
Kids global warming book 'deceives'
500 scientists refute global warming dangers
Sizzling study concludes: Global warming 'hot air'
Newsweek v. Newsweek on global warming denial
Laurie David climate book targets children
Fox News targeted for global warming 'stance'
Low temp blamed for small crowd at global warming fest
U.N. leader: Darfur slaughter triggered by global warming
Light bulb ban craze exceeds disposal plans
Gore refuses to take energy pledge
Harvard Ph.D ties illegals bill to global warming
Consumers in dark over risks of new light bulbs
Planet Earth banning common light bulbs
Gore plan would 'ban new cars and people'
Gore home's energy use: 20 times average
Retirees trade sailing dream for Al Gore war
U.S. climate researcher: We've got 10 years left
Pat Robertson converts - to 'global warming'
ABC News begs: Send us 'global warming' evidence
Protest decries 'global-warming cover-up'
Global warming? It's in the stars, says scientist
Environmentalists blast Gore: 'Take back toxic electronics'
Poll: 70% of evangelicals see global warming threat
Scientists slam Gore
Barbra Streisand: 'Global warming emergency'
Bush, 'global warming' to blame for hurricane?
Putin adviser says Kyoto 'smoke screen'
'Global warming' hype reaches fever pitch
Whites more to blame for 'global warming'?
Study: 'Global warming' claims overheated?
Gore decries 'global warming' in bitterly cold NYC
'Global-warming' experts ripped for heating planet
Global warming on Mars - without SUVs!
WHO NEEDS A PALESTINIAN STATE?
http://mideastoutpost.com/archives/000567.html
May 25, 2009
Daniel Greenfield
Everyone, and by "everyone" I mean the denizens of Washington D.C.'s and Brussels’ government buildings, agrees that we need a Palestinian state. Chiming in with their "Yes" votes are the dictators of a dozen Arab states who agree that the only thing that will fix the region is adding another Arab dictatorship and subtracting the region's one democracy.
But who actually needs a Palestinian state? Or rather a second Palestinian state. The first Palestinian state, commonly called Jordan, was carved out of the Palestine Mandate and equipped with a refugee ruler from the Hashemite royal family in what is now Saudi Arabia. Today Jordan exists mainly under the protection of the U.S. and Israel, and its population of Palestinian Arabs is a seething mass of Muslim extremists currently enjoying a 30 percent unemployment rate, where the majority of the population supports Osama Bin Laden at a higher rate than even Pakistan.
But Jordan is heaven on earth compared to the Second Palestinian State that the Obama Administration is determined to inflict on Israel. Ruled by mutually hostile armed gangs loyal to either the Fatah or Hamas terrorist groups, Palestine 2.0 has been a failed state for over a decade. Every attempt at foreign investment has failed. The ruins of industrial zones, greenhouses and even a casino dot the landscape. Palestinian Arab Christians from overseas who returned to build up the economy fled quickly in the face of relentless shakedowns, kidnappings and militia gangs masquerading as law enforcement.
The vast majority of Palestinian Arabs work for two employers, UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority, which in turn is funded by foreign donors. Work for the Palestinian Authority usually means belonging to a militia gang which is loyal to a particular figure in the PA leadership, who in turn passes that loyalty on to the current "government." With little to do, the gangs spend their free time dealing drugs, carrying out terrorist attacks and collecting protection money from their town's remaining stores.
For 17 years, Israel, America and just about every interested party has tried to build a Palestinian state. They provided weapons and training to build a modern Palestinian police force. They sent advisers and fortunes in economic aid, thousands per Palestinian Arab. Billions in funds from the EU, America and various do-gooders were swallowed up to fund the lavish lifestyles of Arafat and his henchmen.
Year after year, the proposed Palestinian state has become a worse place. Given its own military, political, legal and economic system, "Palestine" has made the region more unstable than ever. Proposing that more of this will stabilize the region is akin to a man setting fire to one piece of furniture after another in his living room, and claiming that when the entire room is on fire, it will be a safe place to live.
So I ask again, who needs a Palestinian state? If the Palestinian Arabs really wanted a state (a second state) in Gaza, the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem, they could have had it before 1967, when those territories were in Arab hands. Instead the PLO back then called for no Palestinian state and the destruction of Israel. As Clinton discovered to his chagrin at the end of his term, Arafat did not want a state and was not interested in an Israeli offer that gave him 99 percent of what he said he wanted. Is it any surprise that Hamas today follows the same party line?
And really why would they want a Palestinian state? If a state was actually created, the UNRWA would have to close up shop. A Palestinian state could no longer rely on foreign donors to fund the hundred thousand or so armed gangsters who form its "government" and its only real form of employment. And the same Muslim states who pass along "charity" to help fund the "martyr operations" that are behind much of the local terrorism would turn elsewhere.
Instead for 17 years the same tired opera has been playing in the region's one theater. First the world's statesmen and diplomats descend on Israel, crying that the only hope for regional stability is a Palestinian state. Israeli diplomats arrive with a generous territorial offer, counterbalanced by a second clause that asks for an end to terrorism.. That second clause is immediately ignored by everyone in the room.
Next the Palestinian Authority diplomats arrive demanding twice as much land, no more border security preventing terrorists from entering Israel, half of Israel's capital, contiguous borders that would cut Israel in half, the ethnic cleansing of all Jews from territories claimed by them—and finally the return of the "refugees," which is code for unlimited immigration from their proposed Palestinian State into Israel.
The Israelis make a counteroffer. The statesmen and diplomats accuse Israel of rejecting peace. The Palestinian Arabs begin carrying out terrorist attacks again (assuming they even bothered to stop during the negotiations). Israel bombs the terrorists. The statesmen and diplomats accuse Israel of perpetuating the cycle of violence, and urge everyone to go back to the negotiating table and the whole "Cycle of Peacemaking" repeats itself all over again.
The Palestinian ruling powers derive their authority from two forces:
1. The Muslim desire to destroy Israel as an infidel state whose existence contradicts Islam. This keeps the money and arms flowing in to the different factions, as well as provides popular support by Arabs.
2. Western and Israel diplomats who keep trying to create a Palestinian state out of the bizarre notion that such a state would bring the terrorism to an end. Like all Dhimmi behaviors in regard to Islam, they ignore the fact that the short term goal of terrorism is terrorism. The long term goal of terrorism is to conquer and hold the territory of the terrorized. Palestinian nationalism has always been a crock, a transparently phony justification for terrorism that has always come before nationalism. Palestine was never a country or a state. It was the name given by the Roman occupation forces to a region they were administering, a region far larger than modern day Israel. There was never an Arab Palestinian king or ruler until Arafat.
Nearly two decades of terrorism have turned the endless rounds of peace negotiations into a joke. Half the Palestinian Authority is now ruled by the Iranian backed Hamas terrorist group, which insists it will never recognize or accept permanent peace with Israel—a state of affairs that never would have come into being had Israel not completely withdrawn from Gaza in the first place.
So once again, who wants or needs a Palestinian state?
Israel did not come into being out of pity for the millions of Jews killed in the Holocaust. Nor did it come into being thanks to U.S. aid or support. Both of these are common myths.
The State of Israel was in place well before the Holocaust, in the form of an embryonic country of farmers who drained the swamps, businessmen who set up shops, journalists who printed newspapers, and soldiers who trained to protect and defend their homeland. When the UN recognized Israel, it simply accepted the fait accompli that Israel existed and was capable of taking care of itself, which it proved by fighting the armies of the surrounding Arab nations to a standstill. It did it without U.S. military aid, which only came into the picture much later with the Kennedy administration. It did it, because the people of Israel genuinely wanted their own state and worked to make it happen.
By 1942, 17 years after the Palestine Mandate, the Jews of Israel had built a thriving country, from power generators to vast stretches of farmland, from a revived language to the Technion, created in 1924 and considered one of the leading electrical engineering and computer science schools in the world.
Seventeen years after Oslo, the Palestinian Arabs have built nothing but death and destruction. Worse yet they've taken everything that was given to them and turned it into either a weapon or a bribe. Not even the most liberally minded thinker can point to anything in the Palestinian Authority leadership that suggests that they're capable of running a functional state. Which is why that same species will naturally duck the question and begin blaming Israel instead.
The two state solution is not a formula for any kind of stability or end to the violence. It's meant to take the violence to a whole new level. It is a formula for the destruction of Israel. Seventeen years of peacemaking by Israelis has produced 17 years of terrorism by the Palestinian Arabs. Everything sowed on the Palestinian Authority, from money to guns, from autonomy to infrastructure, have come up as dragon's teeth.
Palestine is not a state. Palestine is a gun aimed at the head of Israel with one goal, its destruction. Palestine is a gun aimed at the head of every Jew in the world, legitimizing the worst and ugliest kinds of bigotry. Palestine is an imaginary place given form as a vicious myth, brainwashing generation after generation of Jordanian and Egyptian Arabs to call themselves Palestinians and kill and die in the name of perpetuating a second Holocaust, all for the glory of Allah, Mohammed, Marx, not to mention Saddam Hussein, Ahmadinejad, the House of Saud, and every cause and ruler with an interest in toppling Israel into the dust.
Palestine is death. It exists as a form of living death by people taught to see themselves as willing martyrs to the bomb belt from birth. It breathes death, celebrates death, teaches death and preaches death. It is the final ugly end of the hatred and cruelty bottled up in the Arab and Islamic dictatorships of the region. It is the true face of Islam and its shining reflection in the mirror of the Western press and diplomats is the true measure of their Dhimmitude.
The cult of death in Palestine and the war against Israel is only a preview for the West of things to come. Palestine is not a place; it is hate and homicide boiled down into myth. Palestine is not only in Israel. It is in Paris and London. It is in Madrid and Detroit. It is in Sydney and Moscow. It is everywhere that the toxic brew of Muslim fanaticism and Arab nationalism flows. Its flag is the flag of death. Its constitution is a death warrant for every free nation. Its legislature is a smug coven of obese terrorist chieftains sending their followers off to death with the promise of virgin demons fornicating with them in Paradise.
Palestine 2.0 is a monster with only one purpose, to create Holocaust 2.0. That is who needs a Palestinian state. That is why the far left and the far right are both hell-bent on bringing one into being. Accepting the two state solution means accepting death. Rejecting it means embracing life.
Daniel Greenfield blogs under the name of Sultan Knish. This appeared on his blog in May 2009.
May 25, 2009
Daniel Greenfield
Everyone, and by "everyone" I mean the denizens of Washington D.C.'s and Brussels’ government buildings, agrees that we need a Palestinian state. Chiming in with their "Yes" votes are the dictators of a dozen Arab states who agree that the only thing that will fix the region is adding another Arab dictatorship and subtracting the region's one democracy.
But who actually needs a Palestinian state? Or rather a second Palestinian state. The first Palestinian state, commonly called Jordan, was carved out of the Palestine Mandate and equipped with a refugee ruler from the Hashemite royal family in what is now Saudi Arabia. Today Jordan exists mainly under the protection of the U.S. and Israel, and its population of Palestinian Arabs is a seething mass of Muslim extremists currently enjoying a 30 percent unemployment rate, where the majority of the population supports Osama Bin Laden at a higher rate than even Pakistan.
But Jordan is heaven on earth compared to the Second Palestinian State that the Obama Administration is determined to inflict on Israel. Ruled by mutually hostile armed gangs loyal to either the Fatah or Hamas terrorist groups, Palestine 2.0 has been a failed state for over a decade. Every attempt at foreign investment has failed. The ruins of industrial zones, greenhouses and even a casino dot the landscape. Palestinian Arab Christians from overseas who returned to build up the economy fled quickly in the face of relentless shakedowns, kidnappings and militia gangs masquerading as law enforcement.
The vast majority of Palestinian Arabs work for two employers, UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority, which in turn is funded by foreign donors. Work for the Palestinian Authority usually means belonging to a militia gang which is loyal to a particular figure in the PA leadership, who in turn passes that loyalty on to the current "government." With little to do, the gangs spend their free time dealing drugs, carrying out terrorist attacks and collecting protection money from their town's remaining stores.
For 17 years, Israel, America and just about every interested party has tried to build a Palestinian state. They provided weapons and training to build a modern Palestinian police force. They sent advisers and fortunes in economic aid, thousands per Palestinian Arab. Billions in funds from the EU, America and various do-gooders were swallowed up to fund the lavish lifestyles of Arafat and his henchmen.
Year after year, the proposed Palestinian state has become a worse place. Given its own military, political, legal and economic system, "Palestine" has made the region more unstable than ever. Proposing that more of this will stabilize the region is akin to a man setting fire to one piece of furniture after another in his living room, and claiming that when the entire room is on fire, it will be a safe place to live.
So I ask again, who needs a Palestinian state? If the Palestinian Arabs really wanted a state (a second state) in Gaza, the West Bank and Eastern Jerusalem, they could have had it before 1967, when those territories were in Arab hands. Instead the PLO back then called for no Palestinian state and the destruction of Israel. As Clinton discovered to his chagrin at the end of his term, Arafat did not want a state and was not interested in an Israeli offer that gave him 99 percent of what he said he wanted. Is it any surprise that Hamas today follows the same party line?
And really why would they want a Palestinian state? If a state was actually created, the UNRWA would have to close up shop. A Palestinian state could no longer rely on foreign donors to fund the hundred thousand or so armed gangsters who form its "government" and its only real form of employment. And the same Muslim states who pass along "charity" to help fund the "martyr operations" that are behind much of the local terrorism would turn elsewhere.
Instead for 17 years the same tired opera has been playing in the region's one theater. First the world's statesmen and diplomats descend on Israel, crying that the only hope for regional stability is a Palestinian state. Israeli diplomats arrive with a generous territorial offer, counterbalanced by a second clause that asks for an end to terrorism.. That second clause is immediately ignored by everyone in the room.
Next the Palestinian Authority diplomats arrive demanding twice as much land, no more border security preventing terrorists from entering Israel, half of Israel's capital, contiguous borders that would cut Israel in half, the ethnic cleansing of all Jews from territories claimed by them—and finally the return of the "refugees," which is code for unlimited immigration from their proposed Palestinian State into Israel.
The Israelis make a counteroffer. The statesmen and diplomats accuse Israel of rejecting peace. The Palestinian Arabs begin carrying out terrorist attacks again (assuming they even bothered to stop during the negotiations). Israel bombs the terrorists. The statesmen and diplomats accuse Israel of perpetuating the cycle of violence, and urge everyone to go back to the negotiating table and the whole "Cycle of Peacemaking" repeats itself all over again.
The Palestinian ruling powers derive their authority from two forces:
1. The Muslim desire to destroy Israel as an infidel state whose existence contradicts Islam. This keeps the money and arms flowing in to the different factions, as well as provides popular support by Arabs.
2. Western and Israel diplomats who keep trying to create a Palestinian state out of the bizarre notion that such a state would bring the terrorism to an end. Like all Dhimmi behaviors in regard to Islam, they ignore the fact that the short term goal of terrorism is terrorism. The long term goal of terrorism is to conquer and hold the territory of the terrorized. Palestinian nationalism has always been a crock, a transparently phony justification for terrorism that has always come before nationalism. Palestine was never a country or a state. It was the name given by the Roman occupation forces to a region they were administering, a region far larger than modern day Israel. There was never an Arab Palestinian king or ruler until Arafat.
Nearly two decades of terrorism have turned the endless rounds of peace negotiations into a joke. Half the Palestinian Authority is now ruled by the Iranian backed Hamas terrorist group, which insists it will never recognize or accept permanent peace with Israel—a state of affairs that never would have come into being had Israel not completely withdrawn from Gaza in the first place.
So once again, who wants or needs a Palestinian state?
Israel did not come into being out of pity for the millions of Jews killed in the Holocaust. Nor did it come into being thanks to U.S. aid or support. Both of these are common myths.
The State of Israel was in place well before the Holocaust, in the form of an embryonic country of farmers who drained the swamps, businessmen who set up shops, journalists who printed newspapers, and soldiers who trained to protect and defend their homeland. When the UN recognized Israel, it simply accepted the fait accompli that Israel existed and was capable of taking care of itself, which it proved by fighting the armies of the surrounding Arab nations to a standstill. It did it without U.S. military aid, which only came into the picture much later with the Kennedy administration. It did it, because the people of Israel genuinely wanted their own state and worked to make it happen.
By 1942, 17 years after the Palestine Mandate, the Jews of Israel had built a thriving country, from power generators to vast stretches of farmland, from a revived language to the Technion, created in 1924 and considered one of the leading electrical engineering and computer science schools in the world.
Seventeen years after Oslo, the Palestinian Arabs have built nothing but death and destruction. Worse yet they've taken everything that was given to them and turned it into either a weapon or a bribe. Not even the most liberally minded thinker can point to anything in the Palestinian Authority leadership that suggests that they're capable of running a functional state. Which is why that same species will naturally duck the question and begin blaming Israel instead.
The two state solution is not a formula for any kind of stability or end to the violence. It's meant to take the violence to a whole new level. It is a formula for the destruction of Israel. Seventeen years of peacemaking by Israelis has produced 17 years of terrorism by the Palestinian Arabs. Everything sowed on the Palestinian Authority, from money to guns, from autonomy to infrastructure, have come up as dragon's teeth.
Palestine is not a state. Palestine is a gun aimed at the head of Israel with one goal, its destruction. Palestine is a gun aimed at the head of every Jew in the world, legitimizing the worst and ugliest kinds of bigotry. Palestine is an imaginary place given form as a vicious myth, brainwashing generation after generation of Jordanian and Egyptian Arabs to call themselves Palestinians and kill and die in the name of perpetuating a second Holocaust, all for the glory of Allah, Mohammed, Marx, not to mention Saddam Hussein, Ahmadinejad, the House of Saud, and every cause and ruler with an interest in toppling Israel into the dust.
Palestine is death. It exists as a form of living death by people taught to see themselves as willing martyrs to the bomb belt from birth. It breathes death, celebrates death, teaches death and preaches death. It is the final ugly end of the hatred and cruelty bottled up in the Arab and Islamic dictatorships of the region. It is the true face of Islam and its shining reflection in the mirror of the Western press and diplomats is the true measure of their Dhimmitude.
The cult of death in Palestine and the war against Israel is only a preview for the West of things to come. Palestine is not a place; it is hate and homicide boiled down into myth. Palestine is not only in Israel. It is in Paris and London. It is in Madrid and Detroit. It is in Sydney and Moscow. It is everywhere that the toxic brew of Muslim fanaticism and Arab nationalism flows. Its flag is the flag of death. Its constitution is a death warrant for every free nation. Its legislature is a smug coven of obese terrorist chieftains sending their followers off to death with the promise of virgin demons fornicating with them in Paradise.
Palestine 2.0 is a monster with only one purpose, to create Holocaust 2.0. That is who needs a Palestinian state. That is why the far left and the far right are both hell-bent on bringing one into being. Accepting the two state solution means accepting death. Rejecting it means embracing life.
Daniel Greenfield blogs under the name of Sultan Knish. This appeared on his blog in May 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)