How do you explain the whole Arab world raising against dictators, sacrificing lives in thousands.. everywhere except PA and Israeli Arab sector? - ..these ones are supposed to be first victims of "Zionist genocide".
Here it is, an awful secret. Netanyahu doesn't need to make peace with Arabs because de-facto peace is already established. Israel is not at war with those, even yesterday enemies, who have stopped hostility.
Taking into account the schizophrenic nature of "Arab street" there, and meagre prespectives for political stability, the factual peace is the best available option. And Arabs quietly accept this.
Of course, you should read what Phillips wrote. She is one of the best commentators writing today. And here is more proof of that.
The Times (£) reports that half the board of the Middle East Centre at the London School of Economics, which has received money from Libya among other Arab dictatorships, has called for a boycott of Israel, the one democracy in the Middle East.
Now, apparently, there are some red faces:
The university has already been urged by its own dons to give up the £300,000 it received from a foundation headed by the son of Colonel Gaddafi. Howard Davies, the LSE director, is said to have told academics this week that he was ashamed of the institution’s links to the dictatorship.
Questions have been emerging about the LSE’s wider reliance on finance from authoritarian regimes. One of its lecture halls has been named in honour of a sheikh reputed to have promoted anti-Semitic material.
Hypocrisy on the Left? Who could have imagined that? I've always been assured that hypocrisy is an exclusive failure of conservatives, as are all failures.
As long as were talking about Progressives' willful blindness on Israel and the Middle East, here's a good one by Nick Cohen.
The Arab revolution is consigning skip-loads of articles, books and speeches about the Middle East to the dustbin of history. In a few months, readers will go through libraries or newspaper archives and wonder how so many who claimed expert knowledge could have turned their eyes from tyranny and its consequences.
To a generation of politically active if not morally consistent campaigners, the Middle East has meant Israel and only Israel. In theory, they should have been able to stick by universal principles and support a just settlement for the Palestinians while opposing the dictators who kept Arabs subjugated. Few, however, have been able to oppose oppression in all its forms consistently. The right has been no better than the liberal-left in its Jew obsessions. The briefest reading of Conservative newspapers shows that at all times their first concern about political changes in the Middle East is how they affect Israel. For both sides, the lives of hundreds of millions of Arabs, Berbers and Kurds who were not involved in the conflict could be forgotten.
If you doubt me, consider the stories that the Middle Eastern bureau chiefs missed until revolutions that had nothing to do with Palestine forced them to take notice.
What's really surprising is that this is from a British newspaper. I wonder how Cohen got away with this.
Next up is this piece by Alan Dershowitz, a member of that rare species of pro-Israel liberal, in which he exposes the ACLU's attempt at censorship.
The international campaign to prevent speakers from delivering pro-Israel talks at universities has been assisted by leaders of the American Civil Liberties Union—an organization that is supposed to protect freedom of speech for all. The method used to silence these speakers and preclude their audiences from hearing their message is exemplified by a now infamous event at the University of California at Irvine.
Michael Oren—a distinguished scholar and writer, a moderate supporter of the two-state solution, and now Israel's Ambassador to the United States—was invited to speak. The Muslim Student Union set out to prevent him from delivering his talk Here is the way Erwin Chemerinksy, Dean of the law school, described what the students did:
"The Muslim Student Union orchestrated a concerted effort to disrupt the speech. One student after another stood and shouted so that the ambassador could not be heard. Each student was taken away only to be replaced by another doing the same thing."
Oh well, since they're only censoring pro-Israel speech, maybe it's not really censorship. We'll have to await the ACLU ruling.
And now for something completely different, a disturbing video showing another reason why support for education is not the same as support for the MEA.
And teachers in the audience really cheered this speech? Is that what really what they believe? They'd better hope this video doesn't get the attention it deserves.
Like everyone else, I've been watching the madness in Wisconsin. Being a public school teacher, (yeah I may have mentioned that once or twice in the past) I'm disgusted with the teachers in Wisconsin. I understand not wanting to take a pay cut. I took one this year, and I have to pay more out of pocket for my insurance. It hurts. I hate it. But I also understand that the money has to come from somewhere, and if the money isn't there, cuts have to be made. (I'm a taxpayer tool, as much as I hate that). I also know that my school district has made some poor financial decisions in the past that I and other teachers are now paying for. Could we have done anything about that? Probably not. But that's another post, the one where I question why we have school boards.
But back in Wisconsin, how can teachers pretend that they have the best interests of the students at heart when they've abandoned their students or dragged them along to the demonstrations in order to save their own paychecks? Students are supposed to learn what from this? The benefits of mob rule? If the democratic process doesn't produce the results that you want, then it's time to hit the streets? The union has become the fourth branch of government? Why work when you can protest? Doctors are frauds who will write phony prescriptions for political purposes? Teachers are liars who will abandon the students that they've agreed to teach if they don't get their way?
I've watched some of the videos of the union protesters. It's obvious that civility is only expected from conservatives and Republicans. Union members, Democrats, and anyone else on the Left is free to make their own rules and be as rude and violent as they want. Who's going to care? The Press, who is on the side of the unions? The Obama White House corruptocrats, who are owned by the unions?
We're on February break this week, and if I believed in this madness, I could go to Lansing to protest too. I'd rather find a way to get some of my paycheck back from my union that spends my hard earned money on outrageous salaries for union leaders and sends money to organizations that I don't much care for.
Oh, and more money for education does not, as we have seen for years, improve the quality of education. We need vast curriculum changes for that.
Another absurdity that is subverting the democratic process and that is being given tacit approval by the Press and by the White House, is the childish and undemocratic tactic of the Democrat representatives in Wisconsin leaving town to avoid having to vote on Gov. Walker's bill. Had Republicans done this to avoid voting on Obamacare, they would have been tarred and feathered.
The whinyness and selfishness of the left, the fact that they are willing to sink as low as necessary and be as brutal as they are, and damage the country and the country's laws without a second thought in order to get their way is truly amazing. I do hope the grown ups are able to restore order at some point, and that students are able to go back to school.
Well, it seems that the terror apologists at CAIR (unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial) don't much care for Rep. Allen West. But then, they don't care much for anybody who has the temerity to point what various imams and other members of that tiny minority of extremist blah blah blah, have been telling us for years. Mainly that Islam is on the Earth in order to subjugate all others under the flag of Islam.
Rep. West shows his leadership qualities by not only not backing down or apologizing for telling the truth, but by having the facts that he needs at his fingertips.
I've always liked ridicule as a weapon against the Israel haters. It's easy to do because they're so mired in hatred, that the jokes go right past them, kind of like the facts do. I found the poster here. I like this site, and as you can see, I'm now linked to it.
Apparently civility and free speech only apply to one side at Columbia University – the anti-military side. Woe be unto you if you have the temerity to stand up in an open forum as a member of the Columbia University community and voice an opinion in opposition to that which is prevalent there.
A wounded Iraq war veteran found that out recently as he stood up – something he had to learn to do again after his wounds – and gave what the NY Post describes as an “impassioned challenge to fellow students on their perceptions of the military.” It occurred during the second of three meetings the University has scheduled to talk about ROTC and the possibility of bringing it back on campus.
The comment section is worth reading. As one commenter points out, they gave a polite reception to Iranian president and genocidal maniac, Mahmoud Ahmadinajad.
My greatest hope after reading about these brain-dead, elitist a**holes, is that I raised my own children with a functioning moral compass and the ability to differentiate between right and wrong, both on a personal and on a societal level.
A friend of mine emailed me the following video: "Colonel Allen West Answers a Marine's Question". By today's standards, at 3 minutes, 42 seconds, it's a pretty lengthy video. At my age though, I can keep my attention focused for extended periods of time. On really good videos, I've been known to watch uninterrupted for five or six minutes. But like I was saying, watch the video. I had never heard of West before, but now, I would give him my vote for president.
Notice, if you will, that the man is (dare I say it?) honest. He pulls no punches in order to pander to the Islamic, or the progressive, or the delusions of peace vote. He understands the problem with Islam and isn't afraid to state it in public, on camera, without the cover of weasel words or quibbling politically correct speech. Honesty. From a congressman. It shouldn't be that surprising or unexpected. It's a shame that it is.
But wait! There's more. Read his Wikipedia page.
While serving in Taji, Iraq, on August 20, 2003, West was in charge of the interrogation of Yahya Jhodri Hamoodi, a civilian Iraqi police officer suspected of having information about attacks on American troops in the area. Interrogators had been informed the detainee knew about a planned ambush. When the detainee refused to talk, LTC West was asked to assist. Hamoodi continued to withhold information, and West was accused of firing his pistol past the prisoner's head, frightening him into talking. According to West's sworn statement, the detainee told West:
[The attack] was to occur Friday morning in Saba al Boor vicinity of the police station by positioned snipers supposedly being brought in from Fallujah. [The detainee] was to ID my vehicle and myself for these rooftop firers. We took this information and the following day established flask CPs and used AH-64s overhead. There was no attack and no further attacks have emanated from the town since the apprehension of [the detainee] and his named associates.
At least one suspect was arrested as a result of the information obtained through the detainee's information. The suspect's home was searched, but no plans for attacks or weapons were found. West testified he did not know if "any corroboration" of a plot was ever found. He added: "At the time I had to base my decision on the intelligence I received. It's possible that I was wrong about Mr. Hamoodi."
West, who had completed almost 22 years of active service, was charged with violating articles 128 (assault) and 134 (general article) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was processed through an Article 32 hearing in November 2003, where he stated "I know the method I used was not right, but I wanted to take care of my soldiers" and was fined $5,000. LTC West accepted the judgment and retired with full benefits in the summer of 2004. Asked if he would have act differently if under similar circumstances again, West testified, "If it's about the lives of my soldiers at stake, I'd go through hell with a gasoline can."
So along with honesty, we can add loyalty, bravery, fortitude, and fearlessness.
Of course, not everybody likes West. While I was watching this video again, I noticed a video with Keith Olberman and another with Ed Schultz, both denouncing West. These are denunciations that are easily expected. Schlutz has a history of respecting Al Sharpton, whom he has interviewed on a few occasions. And Olberman? I've read and listened to things that this hateful, hypocritical, pompous twit has said about his political opponents. He is everything that Leftists claim the Rush Limbaugh is. Both of these wise guys adore Obama, who embodies none of the qualities exhibited by West.
When it comes to honesty, we have documented examples of Obama lying about the deficit, the costs of Obamacare, his support for Israel, and other policy decisions he's made. I don't know if West has lied to get to where he is. If so, Olberman, and Schlutz, and Moveon.org, and the rest of the "Progressive" noise machine will ferret out any dishonesty. So far, from the few videos I've seen, the only thing they have is character assassination.
Rep. West was loyal enough to his troops to put his career in danger in a situation where he had to think fast to possibly save American lives. In hindsight, he may have been a bit heavy handed, but he didn't have the luxury of hindsight nor did he have weeks, months, and years to reexamine the situation from every possible angle in order to come up with the perfect solution that would please everyone and harm nobody.
Judging by the way Obama threw friends and family "under the bus" when they became hindrances, one would think that he and his supporters see loyalty as a character flaw. Under loyalty, I would include loyalty to one's country, you know that old fashion concept, the former virtue known as patriotism. West put on a uniform and trained to fight for his country against his countries enemies, both foreign and domestic. Obama can't even summon the fortitude to name our country's enemies, even when those enemies proudly declare themselves.
This is not to say that Obama or those on the Left are the only politicians I don't trust. I don't trust politicians in general, and chances are that if he were elected president, he would do something either during the campaign or during his administration to set me off. The difference with West is, that he's starting from a position of strength when it comes to his basic moral character and stance. It appears that he's putting his own personal power and status behind his need to do what's best for the country. And that's something admirable in anybody.
I got the photo above from Talking Tachlis. They copied it from a flyer for an Israel-bashing event. I was at the event. There were a lot of pro-Israel people there to ask tough questions and to let the Israel haters know that we will challenge them and their useful Jewish idiots every chance we get. It was clear that the moderators of this Anti-Israel hatefest were intimidated by having a large minority of Israel supporters in the audience.
During the Q & A, they asked that questions be written on postcards. They were forced to ask some of our more intense questions, rather than just the easy ones from supporters.
As for the photo: the two photos, side by side, are supposed to show the moral equivalence between the Holocaust and the Palestinian's "plight". The viewer, if properly trained by years of exposure to anti-Israel rhetoric, and rehashed and updated anti-Semitic libels, is supposed to see the poor beleaguered walkers in both pictures as equal in their victimhood. They are also supposed to take a leap of hate, with help from Hajo Meyer and his morally deficient crew, in order to blame Israel and Zionists for the Arabs (now officially Palestinians) who were either forced from their homes in a war of attempted genocide started by the Arab/Muslim nations surrounding the nascent state of Israel, or picked up and left on their own after being promised by their genocidal leaders that they could return to their homes and maybe even pick up a bit of plunder from the Jews, after the Jews were driven into the sea. Oops!
It's true, the Arabs, once they removed themselves from their premises in what is now Israel discovered, much to their chagrin, that their move was permanent. Bummer. But lets take a look at what happened to the people in both photos in the days, weeks, and years after those two photographs were taken. The Jews from the Warsaw ghetto were most likely reduced to smoke and ashes a short time after they arrived at Auschwitz, the destination of trains that they are most likely headed toward. Some may have lived longer, maybe as long as a few months, and a very few actually survived to tell their stories. And to have children and grandchildren.
The Arabs in the other photo, temporarily (they thought) fleeing their homes (maybe, we have to take the word of Jew-hating terror supporters) will grow up and have families of their own. They will live to see their children grow up to have children of their own. The fact that this will happen in "refugee camps" is the fault of their own feckless leaders, the UN, the Arab/Muslim world, and generations of useful idiots in the West. Any abuse they suffer will be at the hands of their fellow Arabs who will force them and their descendants to live as pawns in a war against Israel, one of the fronts of the world wide Islamic jihad.
As they fester in "refugee camps", they will be taught that it's all the fault of the Jews. They will grow up knowing nothing but hatred to the point that some of them will be willing to turn themselves into human bombs and blow up Jews along with themselves. Among the Muslim world, they will be called heroes and martyrs for trying to finish the job that was started back in 1930s Germany. Their fondest wish will be to murder the descendants of Jews who were fortunate to either live through the Nazi death camps or who were even luckier not to live in Europe during the Holocaust.
The point is that the Arabs we see walking down a dusty road through a picturesque countryside got to live their lives. The Jews being herded through a Warsaw street didn't. And there can be no moral equivalence between life and death.
Everybody has a comment, or a prediction, or both, or more on Egypt and the current uprising there. I've been cogitating on their predicament, trying to decide what to say myself. I've been reading commentary from pundits that I respect. I think that once things settle down in Egypt, things will probably get much worse. What gives me that feeling is the following video:
These cannot be the only Egyptians who share this feeling. I'm guessing that it's pervasive throughout Egyptian society. And to go along with their irrational hatred of Israel, they now have a shiny new air force built with help from the United States, and billions of dollars transferred from American taxpayers to Egypt.
How many more Islamic dictatorships will be overthrown and replaced by a new generation of Jew haters whose first order of business will be the destruction of Israel?
"No one can find a safe way out for himself if socety is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. None can stand aside with unconcern; the interests of everyone hang on the result." -- Ludwig von Mises