Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Judaism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judaism. Show all posts

Monday, January 11, 2016

NASA's cultural and religious bigotry for all to see.

Watch: NASA’s chief climate scientist Gavin Schmidt claims Texans won’t listen to ‘liberal, Jewish atheist from NYC’ about ‘global warming’



From the comments:

Shame on you Gavin. The people in texas are polite, intelligent, and perfectly capable of hearing the message. You're just a stereotyping bigot who can't relate to anyone who isnt a liberal Jewish atheist from New York.

The very real problem demonstrated by the empirical evidence Gavin IS that they don't believe the scientists. How about you dig down in and ask them WHY they dont trust you anymore. I dare you.

What a sad little man you are.

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

My life of hell in an Afghan harem

Why would a nice Jewish girl marry a Muslim Afghan? 

It is 1959. I am only 18 when my prince — a dark, older, handsome, westernized foreigner who had traveled abroad from his native home in Afghanistan — bedazzles me.

We meet at Bard College, where he is studying economics and politics and I am studying literature on scholarship.

Abdul-Kareem is the son of one of the founders of the modern banking system in Afghanistan. He wears designers sunglasses and bespoke suits and when he visits New York City, he stays at the Plaza.

He is also Muslim.

I am Jewish, raised in an Orthodox home in Borough Park, Brooklyn, the daughter of Polish immigrants. My dad worked door-to-door selling soda and seltzer.

But none of this matters. We don’t talk about religion. Instead, we stay up all night discussing film, opera and theater. We are bohemians.

We date for two years. Then, when I express my desire to travel, he asks me to marry him.

I don't think we're getting the whole story here, but it doesn't matter. She arrives in Kabul and finds what it's like to live in a compound with a mother-in-law who's ready to kill her if she doesn't obey.  And a husband who's transformed from a well dressed, "Westernized" bohemian to a Muslim in a Muslim society.  Let's just say that it's not what she expected. 

She finally escapes, sick and pregnant. And she not only survives but learns something about the romantic image that Liberalism weaves with its fantasy of multiculturalism.

I’ve never told this story in detail before, but felt that I must now. Because I hear some westerners preach the tortured cultural relativism that excuses the mistreatment of women in the name of Islam. Because I see the burqa on the streets of Paris and New York and feel that Afghanistan has followed me back to America.

I call myself a feminist — but not just any feminist. My kind of feminism was forged in the fires of Afghanistan. There I received an education — an expensive, almost deadly one — but a valuable one, too.

I understand firsthand how deep-seated the hatred of women is in that culture. I see how endemic indigenous barbarism and cruelty is and unlike many other intellectuals and feminists, I don’t try to romanticize or rationalize it.

I got out, and I will never return.
She also manages to translate the experiences she had at the hands of her first lover to her all men.  She was primed for it as a young girl and never really learned to outgrow it as a woman.  It should have been a teachable moment; instead she incorporated her treatment in Afghanistan into her skewed worldview.  Rather sad.

Monday, April 08, 2013

The Truth About Pamela Geller

Its incredible how one Jewish woman speaking to one Long Island synagogue’s men’s club can generate the wrath of so many progressive-first “Jewish” organizations. As soon as the word spread that Pamela Geller, blogger and fighter of radical Islam would be appearing at Great Neck Synagogue on April 14 The PC Police began an e-mail and phone campaign seeking to get the talk canceled....

Here is the truth about Pamela Geller. There are people in the world who see a wrong, give a quick "oh that's so sad" and get on with their lives. Then there are others who see a wrong and go all out to right it. That’s Pamela-- someone who goes out of her way to do what we call in Hebrew, Tikun Olam, repair the world.
 
The Left at work.  Read the whole thing.

Saturday, March 05, 2011

Religious persecution around the world.

Just a little update ...

In the U S of A, we have Muslims beating up Jews.
A first of its kind federal civil rights case has been filed in United States District Court in Oakland, California, against the University of California at Berkeley, by a Jewish student who had been assaulted on campus last year by a leader of a Muslim student organization during a pro-Israel event.
In Egypt, Christian churches are being burned - with the Christians possibly inside.
Nearly 4000 Muslims Attack Christian Homes in Egypt, Torch Church (AINA) -- A mob of nearly four thousand Muslims has attacked Coptic homes this evening in the village of Soul, Atfif in Helwan Governorate, 30 kilometers from Cairo, and torched the Church of St. Mina and St. George. There are conflicting reports about the whereabouts of the Church pastor Father Yosha and three deacons who were at church; some say they died in the fire and some say they are being held captive by the Muslims inside the church.

In Ethiopia it's the same story:
Washington, D.C. (March 3, 2011)–International Christian Concern (ICC) has learned that in the past two days, thousands of Muslims have razed five churches and the homes of two evangelists in Asendabo, Ethiopia. Christian leaders are asking for protection after the Muslim attackers continued burning churches even after the federal police were sent to the town.

The Muslims started the attacks yesterday after falsely accusing the Christians of desecrating the Qur’an. More than ten thousand Muslims shouted “Allah Akbar” (Allah is great) as they burned down five evangelical churches. The government sent the federal police force to protect the Christians after the Muslims burned down the first three churches. The Muslims overwhelmed the police force and burned down two more churches today.
Of course the Liberal community ignores these acts while the Gay community loudly proclaims its victimhood at the hands of those dastardly Christianists.

Meanwhile in Pakistan Christian officials and those who try to protect them are being killed right and left.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

If you wonder who the protestors on 9/12 were protesting, look no further than HERE

A million or so people gathered on Washington to protest recently and were accused of
-being a small, insignificant yet dangerous group of
-racists,
-rednecks,
-and haters.

They came from all across the country, many driving themselves rather than being bused in. Most carried home-made signs protesting profligate government spending, government intrusion into their lives and the breakneck lurch to the left being led by Team Obama.

But in a more general way they were protesting a mindset. They were tired of being abused verbally, emotionally, spiritually. They were protesting a group of people who believe they are the smartest, most enlightened people in the universe and who felt entitled to run the country and make the rules, no matter what anyone said. They were protesting the denizens if this particular thread of the Volokh Conspiracy who view them as bigoted, racist, religion ridden hicks who need to be kept down for their own good, because if the foot was ever removed from their necks, blacks, Jews and every other non-Christian group would be enslaved.

Here is the mindset they were protesting:

  • Superiority: Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and progressive: Jews are highly educated and highly educated people tend to believe in progressive values
  • Bias: Christian right's desire to base government policy, public school curricula, etc. on Christian religious doctrine.
  • Hate: You have to realize that in the last couple decades, the GOP has been swallowed by the screaming nutcases we saw on display last Saturday
  • Religious bigotry: Non-evangelicals who might blanch at hearing "jew him down" are perfectly comfortable with using "talmudic" or "pharisee" as an insult.I said that in my personal experience a greater percentage of evangelical Christians than non-evangelical Christians express anti-Semitic views. Not all evangelical Christians express those views, of course, and I never said otherwise. But based on personal experience, the percentage who do is not insubstantial.
  • Historical illiteracy: Historically, Jews who convert have been at the forefront of turning back around and literally killing those who don't.


These are the people whose like-minded compatriots teach our children, man the courts, and in general populate the halls of governmental power. This is the disdain, the smug self-regard, the unexamined bigotry that the people who came to Washington were protesting. This is only the beginning, and could well be the second American Revolution.



UPDATE: This attitude was also perfectly encapsulated by Harvard educated Barack Obama when he called Sergeant James Crowley stupid for arresting Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates. Racial solidarity, cultural superiority, or a combination of both. That’s the mindset that’s bringing the people in “flyover country” into the streets.

American Jews, Liberalism, and … hatred of Christians

In line with the ACORN videos, I thought that I would go to a “respected” website and encourage its commenters to reveal themselves. Instead, I found a thread at the Volokh conspiracy that needs no incitement of disdain and hatred.
The essay was by David Bernstein entitled: American Jews, Liberalism, and the Democratic Party


I may make a more detailed contribution to the debate soon, but for now I wanted to point out that Norman Podhoretz and others are conflating two separate issues: the first is why American Jews are generally more liberal than are other Americans, and the second is why American Jews are so attached to the Democratic Party, especially in presidential elections, such that even Jews who are moderate to moderately conservative are presumptive Democratic voters.


These are Liberals and Libertarians speaking to each other.
All comments are cut and pasted, not edited in any way. Please note that these a comments appended to a single essay in a highly respected blog hosted by law professors.

A more telling combination of moral preening and bigotry will be hard to find outside of the Liberal blogosphere. This one is Libertarian.


Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and progressive: Jews are highly educated and highly educated people tend to believe in progressive values (a strong state dedicated to caring for members of society least able to care for themselves; universal health coverage; respecting scientific consensus when it comes to things like global warming and other environmental concerns; and, general protection of minorities and minority rights whether it's homosexuals, Latinos, Blacks, etc.).

Of course, the fact that Jews are progressive must also be due to logical fallacy or irrational ignorance on their part, right, Bernstein? Truly, I am sorry that you are not accepted by the majority of Jewish political-types, but it's your fault, not theirs.
...
I would have thought that Jews' concerns about the Christian right as a political force has less to do with anti-semetism and more to do with the Christian right's desire to base government policy, public school curricula, etc. on Christian religious doctrine.
...
You're simply making this up. Give us some facts. In my experience, a substantial percentage of evangelical Christains (especially in the Deep South) dislike Jews. Some of them support Israel (for a variety of reasons) but still dislike American Jews. And that percentage is far higher than the percentage of Jew haters among non-evangelical Christians.
...
I don't know about anyone else but, as a jew, I would find philo-semetism almost as repulsive as anti-semetism. Anything that essentializes judaisism or jews or thinks about us as a monolith is at best creepy and at worst repugnant.
...
Jews are afraid of a strong central government handing "traditional" values down to the people. This tends to lead to scapegoating. And the scapegoats are the Jews.

Thus, Jews shy away from anything that imposes one group's value system on another. For better or worse, that is the Republican party of today.
...
I think focusing on the personal anti-semitism of Republicans and their supporters misses the point. As Prof. Bernstein has noted elsewhere, it has more to do with the affiliation between the GOP and people who want prayer in schools, official recognition of the US as a Christian nation, etc. A snarky person might refer to these folks as "objectively anti-semitic" since they seek to promote Christianity to the exclusion of other beliefs.
...
You have to realize that in the last couple decades, the GOP has been swallowed by the screaming nutcases we saw on display last Saturday, and moderates, economically conservative Republicans are an endangered, if not nearlly extinct, species. Lincoln Chafee and other former Republicans have talked about this on MSNBC.

I shouldn't complain, of course. This devolution of the Republican party may well make for a generation lost to "conservatism" if not more. But the spectacle is -- at times -- enough to produce projectile emesis of the popcorn we're munching.
...
The fact that I'm vociferous about this is that it is an opinion based on my experience. You state in your post that "in your experience" evangelical Christians are not more anti-Semitic than other Christians. My experience is otherwise. I dont have a surname usually associated with being Jewish (it sounds vaguely Irish) and don't have stereotypical Semitic features. As a result, when I am with a group of Christians it is often assumed I am one of them. I therefore often hear the casual slurs - "he tried to Jew me down" and "those Jews sure do stick together" - as well as the more vicious attacks. Its rare that I hear those type of comments when I'm with a group of Lutherans or Catholics. It's much more common to hear those type of comments when I'm with evangelicals.
...
On the other hand, the anti-semitism of Bill Buckley was foundational to his conservative worldview of WASP supremacy.
...
Non-evangelicals who might blanch at hearing "jew him down" are perfectly comfortable with using "talmudic" or "pharisee" as an insult.
I said that in my personal experience a greater percentage of evangelical Christians than non-evangelical Christians express anti-Semitic views. Not all evangelical Christians express those views, of course, and I never said otherwise. But based on personal experience, the percentage who do is not insubstantial.
...
Say, which political party was it that ran a Creationist sympathizer for Vice President in 2008? Biblical-literalist Creationism doesn't come from the Jewish (or Roman Catholic) way of reading Genesis and bringing it into the public schools is about as clear an example of propagandizing evangelical belief where it doesn't belong as you could ask for. After that, I don't think many Jews (even conservatives) care much whether an individual Creationist likes wildcat settlements in the West Bank and eschews vulgar epithets for Jews.
...
Is Dangermouse a real person or an elaborate parody?
I think that, as with Sarah Palin, this question can only be answered with "yes".
...
1) The whole "America is a Christian Nation" thing is the fastest way to get Jews to vote for someone else. Inquisition-era Spain was very focused on being a "Christian nation" as well. Not to say that James Inhofe is bringing back the rack, but the phrase causes gut-level discomfort.

2) War on Christmas. A lot of conservative Republicans think that if you don't say "Merry Christmas" or have a nativity scene in front of City Hall, it's some sort of godless commie conspiracy. Not that most Jews get all worked up by one little manger, but the language tends toward extreme paranoia.
...
I myself am turned off by Jews for Jesus because they seek through lies and misrepresentation to evangelize young impressionable Jews. They are Intelligent Designers suggesting evolution and religion are somehow compatible in ways they are not.
...
I am turned off by evangelicals because my friends are usually gathering the popcorn to watch me and my family die in the holy war.
...
I am for legal abortion (within limits) because I dislike ANY government telling me what I can do with my body, a dangerous slippery slope. I am for legal abortion because of coat hanger stories. Safe, legal, rare.
...
Republicans were perceived by my family to have been behind the exclusionary immigration laws that kept Jews out of the United States during the 1920's and 1930's. I'm having trouble linking, but it's easy to find links to the Immigration Act of 1924, for example. Yes, many Democrats, especially Southern Democrats supported immigration. So did Samuel Gompers, a Jew. But this was largely a Republican program.
...
It is mind boggling that any intelligent educated Jew can still vote for the repiblican party of the last 8-10 years even if they were loyal republicans before 2001.

War hysteria and propaganda ,
nasty lies,
racism,
Utopian Ayn Randism for teenagers which almost brought this country down on it's knees economically.
...
Look at belligerent ignorance espoused and promoted by the GOP.
And many many more reasons.
...
I know, I know, some will argue that just because the evangelicals believe (or at least claim to believe) that all Jews are damned to eternal hell for failure to accept the story of Jesus Christ as the exclusive path to salvation, and therefore believe that Jews' religious beliefs will damn them forever (with a side of 'we'll nonetheless support you temporarily because that will mean it's time for the Rapture that will condemn Jews to perpetual suffering'), that just because of that, some Jews perceive anti-Semitism in evangelical thought.
...
Day to day, there's a big difference between anti-Israel sentiment, however nasty, and the sort of antisemitism one might see in your daily life. In terms of the latter, I have a whole lot less to fear from Matt Yglesias (Jewish) or Kos than from some guy who thinks we're living in a "Christian Nation" and wants my kid to recite their prayers in schools I pay for in part.
...
This is actually what I find strange. Perfectly normal, law-abiding lawyers and bankers of my acquaintance start talking about how they would like to "kill" the members of Jews for Jesus. In contrast, no one I know ever expresses anything but mild disdain for Scientologists, or Hare Krishna members, or whatever. It's really weird for a group to arouse such hostility among otherwise cultured, urbane, pacific people.
...
Historically, Jews who convert have been at the forefront of turning back around and literally killing those who don't. Often armed with the theological claim that Christianity is the true fulfillment of Judaism, making the rest of us "false Jews." The foundations for this go back to the New Testament and it keeps leading to Jewish bloodshed one way or another.

Friday, February 27, 2009

Buyer's Remorse?

You would think that when you go all out to elect Barack HUSSEIN Obama, you would have clue of the policies you are going to get.



In a swift about face from her views as New York's senator, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now hammering Israel over its treatment of Palestinians in Gaza.

As First Lady, Clinton raised eyebrows when she kissed Suha Arafat.

Since she was then seeking a Senate seat the resulting brouhaha caused her to "re-think" her positions.

"I'm a very strong supporter of Israel," Clinton said back in February 2000.

On Thursday, as Secretary of State she had yet another about face in the form of angry messages demanding Israel speed up aid to Gaza. Jewish leaders are furious.

"I am very surprised, frankly, at this statement from the United States government and from the secretary of state," said Mortimer Zuckerman, publisher of the New York Daily News and member of the NYC Jewish Community Relations Council.

"I liked her a lot more as a senator from New York," Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, said. "Now, I wonder as I used to wonder who the real Hillary Clinton is."

Clinton's decision to hammer Israel comes as the Clintons and President Barack Obama are planning to give the Palestinians $900 million toward the rebuilding of Gaza in the wake of the Israeli offensive that was sparked by Hamas rocket fire.


Apparently not.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Why Jews Vote the Way They Do

Don Feder:

Back in the 1980s, during the euphoria of the Reagan-era, Neo-cons like Norman Podhoretz and Irving Kristol predicted a seismic shift in Jewish voting patterns.

Once American Jews discovered that voting Republican was crucial for the survival of the Jewish state, they’d naturally align themselves with the party that actually believes in national security, we were assured.

It never happened.

After this year’s election – in which Barack Hussein Obama got 77% of the Jewish vote – we can confidently say it never will. Once again, in 2008, most American Jews voted their religion – liberalism.

Some minorities have a clearer perception of where their interests lie. According to the American Muslim Task Force for Civil Rights and Elections, nearly 90% of Muslims voted for Obama, only 2% for McCain – smart Muslims, dumb Jews.

If there was ever a year in which Jews should have been forced to reconsider their robotic loyalty to the Democratic Party, 2008 was it.

The Democratic presidential candidate should have set off alarm bells in the head of the average Jewish voter – from his whack-job pastor’s anti-Israel ravings, to his multiple ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, to his Middle East donors, to his terrorist cheering section, to his refusal to condemn Jimmy Carter’s meeting with Hamas – Jews should have broken out in a cold sweat at the thought of this ideologue directing U.S. military and foreign policy.
...
Along with other dogmatic utopians, they actually believe that any enemies we have are of our own making, that America has generally been a force for oppression and exploitation in the world, that terrorism is born of poverty and despair (rather than a murderous fanaticism), that America must do perpetual penance for past mistakes, and that a Palestinian state will usher in the messianic age. I could go on, but it’s too depressing.
...
To the question, “Would you support or oppose the United States taking military action against Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons,” 47% of Jews said they’d oppose America moving to save Israel from nuclear annihilation, 42% would support it, and 11% were unsure.

This is perhaps the clearest indication that a significant segment of the Jewish community either doesn’t give a damn about Israel or is delusional.


I have a friend who is an elderly Jewish retired professor. He is very, very proud of a grandson who took time off from college to work on the Obama campaign. Not wishing to introduce friction into our relationship I never asked him about the concerns I have regarding Obama's position on Israel and his anti-Semitic associates. I don't have to raise the issue since he is assuredly aware of them. Yet he ignores them and beams with pride at Obama's election.

Saturday, March 29, 2008

FITNA And Islamofascist Rage

Pre-emptive Rage by Diana West in the Washington Times was written before the film was released:



The film is by Geert Wilders, a Dutch member of parliament who wants to reverse the Islamization of Europe and believes the Koran should be banned along with Hitler's "Mein Kampf" for inciting hatred and violence. The film is called "Fitna," Arabic for upheaval. And just the thought of "Fitna" has Europe in upheaval, cowering before widely anticipated Islamic outrage expected to range from diplomatic huff, to economic boycott, to rioting, even bloodshed, over this still unseen ten-minute film.

Such mass psychosis has erupted before — Satanic Verses Rage, Koran Rage, Cartoon Rage, Pope Rage, even Teddy Bear Rage. But never has an Islamic "rage" begun to build without actual cause. For the first time, we are seeing rage preparations and precautions before "offense" has been given or taken.


The Film was 16 minutes, not 10 and was shown on LiveLeak. LiveLeak has taken it down because of threats to its personnel.

The reaction from the supposed defenders of Western freedom was nothing short of sickening:


At a press conference earlier this year, the online Dutch site NIS News Bulletin reported that Mr. Balkenende "stressed repeatedly and with irritation that Wilders and no one else was responsible for any violence that might break out after his film's release." And when Sheikh Tantawi indicates that providing "protection" for Mr. Wilders is a bad idea, it not only sounds like a mafia don calling for a hit, it also echoes the dean of Dutch journalists, Henk Hofland. As Thomas Landen of The Brussels Journal reports, Mr. Hofland urged the Dutch government to withdraw state protection from Mr. Wilders, who lives under constant threat of assassination. "Let him feel what it is like for those whose lives he endangers," said Mr. Hofland, adding that any murders committed in retaliation for Mr. Wilders' opinions on Islam would be the responsibility of Mr. Wilders, not the murderers.


Volokh watched it:


Parts of it are an indubitably sound reminder of the dangers posed by extremist Islam, and the support that it finds from some traditional Islamic religious teachings.

Other parts assert that extremist Islam is a problem at the heart of the Islamic world generally, and of Islam in the Netherlands and in Europe, and not just a tangential matter (the way that fundamentalist Mormon outliers are tangential to modern Mormonism, or, even more extremely, the way the Branch Davidians were tangential to the Seventh-Day Adventists from whom they sprang). But here too Wilders' view seems sound: Unfortunately, while by all accounts most Muslims do not adhere to the extremists' views, the extremist movement is prominent enough in Middle Eastern and European Islam that it is indeed a peril to freedom.

Nor does the rhetoric strike me as excessive. This is of course a rhetorical work, not an academic inquiry, and it's trying to stir people emotionally. But I didn't see much of hyperbole or gratuitious insults. Wilders is arguing against an important and dangerous ideological movement; my sense is that his approach is well within bounds of legitimate criticism.


The Belmont Clubs Wetchard


By publishing the film Wilders has accepted responsibility for crossing a line in the sand. This act will provoke two possible responses. Protests, boycotts, demonstrations and legal action are almost certain to follow demanding the withdrawal of the film of Wilder's censure. There is also a high probability that attempts will be made to attack Western targets in general in reprisal. Radical Islamists, perhaps accustomed to authoritarian social situations, may regard the Dutch broadcasters unwillingness to broadcast Wilder's film as a mere exercise in "plausible deniability" and hold Western society "collectively responsible" anyway.

But the real significance of Wilder's film is to illustrate the growing loss of control by Western governments over the narrative over the nature of the War on Terror. By criticizing Islam itself, a growing number of voices including Geert Wilders and recent convert Magdi Cristiano Allam (who called Islam "inherently evil") have taken one more step towards tearing down the notion, so carefully constructed by George Bush after September 11 of separating terrorism from the "religion of peace".

This is an incredibly important point. Thanks to the connectivity of the Internet, ideas that governments consider "dangerous" can't be stifled any longer. That's why when LiveLeak dropped it, the FITNA has already been downloaded to literally thousands of computers who spread it like a virus. I have several links.

Scott at Powerline


The Dutch Prime Minister says he rejects the interpretation, but he seems to do so because he fears that it has some merit. His comments put me in mind of the bumper sticker "Support mental health or I'll kill you."

The film would not be worthy of note were it not for the fear and threats of violence that the its release has generated. The Iranian regime that commits mass murder in the name of Islam has condemned the film as "hideous" and called on European governments to block the showing of the film. Or else, I guess.


From Little Green Footballs:

Following the release of Geert Wilders’ film Fitna, the European Union is quick to reassure the Islamic world that the whole idea of “free speech” is probably overrated: EU condemns Dutch anti-Islam film.

I have in the past deplored the lack of respect shown for various religions, especially when they could be considered blasphemous ("Piss Christ" is an example that comes to mind). However, that horse has left the barn, at least in regards to Christianity and Judaism. Those who are in the forefront of trying to silence Wilders were also the ones manning the barricades in support of Andres Serrano . The motivations appear to be a mixture: hatred of Christians and Jews, hatred of Western Civilization and rank cowardice.

And today via ReutersU.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday condemned as "offensively anti-Islamic" a Dutch lawmaker's film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence.
The story was reported by Lewis Krauskopf and edited by Mohammad Zargham. You can't make this stuff up.

Saturday, December 15, 2007

We need a respite from peace

Danny at Sampson Blinded is not a fan of the "peace process."


Here, however, is a short summary of our reasons to oppose the peace process.]

Peace process doesn’t lead to peace. Concessions to Arabs and imploring for peace only provoke them for the last-ditch fighting. That correlation is clear at least since the Oslo accords.

Peace process cannot lead to peace. If history is any lesson, peace is only achieved through crushing defeat of one’s enemy.

Peace process is highly unusual. Every other nation destroyed whatever aborigines happened to live on the land that nation chose to build a state.

Peace process is illegal. The original arrangement for the Jewish state included Transjordan, but the British illegally cut it off. Then the UN further partitioned Israel to accommodate Palestinian Arabs.

Peace process is immoral. Palestinian Arabs don’t constitute a nation. Offering them a state is a plot against Jews.

Peace process doesn’t offer safety. Jews need a secure state rather than a beach strip eight miles wide.

Read the rest ...

“Danny” at Sampson Blinded is very much opposed to the “peace process.” I agree with the underlying assumptions of his argument although I think some of his reasoning is a little facile

The fact is that the Israelis and the Arabs have only been able to live in peace as long as the Arabs were dominant. In the Middle East, the few Jews were tolerated because they were a small and manageable minority in countries run by Arabs who followed Islam. Following the founding of the State of Israel, the universal dominance was broken and the despised minority now became a despised minority that was not longer under Arab control. That was intolerable to the Arabs and they were and are determined to end this state of affairs.

Several wars followed.

There is little reason to believe that this situation will end unless and until the United States establishes its hegemony over the region. The Iraq war is a necessary and fundamental basis for this condition. If the United States is able to create a stable and democratic Iraqi state it will have demonstrated its ability to establish the conditions for peace in the region. That is why, for the Jewish people, victory in Iraq is so vital. Should we fail, Israel will fail. If we succeed, Israel will succeed because the Arabs will be forced to acknowledge our ability to control their destiny.

The key to the future, not just of the Middle East but of the rest of the world, is found in Iraq. It’s a terrible challenge and burden that the Left seems incapable of seeing, so consumed are they with BDS. I doubt if most Jews in or out of Israel realize this.

Thursday, November 01, 2007

How long before the A.D.L. kicks out all its Jews?

Ann Coulter and the ADL. Giving it back after being attacked for daring to proclaim Christian views.

The Anti-Defamation League is to Jews what the National Organization for Women is to women and the ACLU is to civil libertarians. They represent not Jews or women or civil libertarians, but the left wing of the Democratic Party.

In the paramount threat of our time, the Democratic Party is AWOL. And those are the patriotic Democrats. The rest are actively aiding the enemy.



Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, a U.S. group that fights racism and anti-Semitism, delivers his speech after he was awarded with the medal of Knight in the Legion of Honor order by French President Jacques Chirac during a ceremony at the Elysee Palace in Paris October 16, 2006. REUTERS/Christophe Ena/Pool (FRANCE) The blood of millions of Israelis is at stake, and the ADL is flacking for a party that yearns to surrender to the terrorists.

To hide the dirty little secret of the left's burgeoning anti-Semitism, liberals act as if they live in abject terror of right-wingers. When it comes to conservatives, the Anti-Defamation League is the Pro-Defamation League.

For decades, most Jews supported the left, and the left supported Jewish causes. But the left moved on long ago. For liberals, Jews are just so "last Holocaust."

The ADL gently chided Columbia University for making the "mistake" of inviting a genocidal, Holocaust-denying Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak. It tepidly criticized Ahmadinejad's speech for being "a charade of half-answers and obfuscation." That sounds like a fair description of Hillary's current stump speech.

The ADL and its ilk reserve their real venom for a beast like Dennis Prager -- a leading Jewish intellectual, author and radio talk show host. Last year, Prager made the manifestly obvious point that the first Muslim congressman, Keith Ellison, should take his oath of office not on a Quran, but on a Bible, in recognition of "the value system (that) underlies American civilization."

According to the ADL, Prager's column was not a trifling "mistake" on the order of allowing an American audience at one of America's premier universities to give a standing ovation to a murderous, racist lunatic. Prager was "intolerant, misinformed and downright un-American." I think I'd take "obfuscation."

The relevant organs of pious liberal society were promptly rounded up to censure Prager, including the American Jewish Committee and two members of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, Rep. Henry Waxman and former New York Mayor Ed Koch -- who called Prager a "bigot." Do they have Ellison on the record acknowledging whether the Holocaust happened?

The executive committee of the Holocaust Museum called Prager's column antithetical to "tolerance and respect for all peoples regardless of their race, religion or ethnicity."

But you'll see that famed liberal "tolerance" dry up pretty fast if you render a simple statement of the beliefs of Christians.

The usual liberal coterie acts shocked and offended by Christians who actually believe Christianity is true -- unlike Democratic politicians -- to conceal the fact that the left is increasingly dominated by people conniving in the destruction of Israel.

How about having Tim Russert ask Hillary if she believes the New Testament is the perfection of the Old Testament? She claims to be a Christian. Let's get it on the table: Is she or isn't she? It doesn't get any more bare-bones than that.

Let the cat out of the bag that a 2,000-year-old religion practiced by a majority of Americans teaches that Jesus came in "fulfillment of the scriptures," and you might be better off if you had adopted the preferred approach of liberals' new friends the Muslims and simply slit the Jew's throat.

At least the ADL wouldn't object.

They're too busy conspiring with the Council on American-Islamic Relations to denounce Dennis Prager. And promoting gun control. And gay marriage. And illegal immigration. You know, all the issues that have historically kept the Jews safe.

The ADL denounces the teaching of intelligent design, the placement of the Ten Commandments on public property and Bibles in public schools. Any entity that disagrees with them on these issues will be labeled an "extremist organization."

Gosh, it's a good thing there isn't a worldwide terrorist movement dedicated to killing Jews. The ADL might have to tear themselves away from promoting faddish liberal causes.

The ADL is more concerned with what it calls the "neo-Nazis" and "anti-Semites" in the Minutemen organization than with people who behead Jews whenever they get half a chance. It's only a matter of time before the ADL gets around to global warming.

Earlier this year, the ADL issued an alarmist report, declaring that the Ku Klux Klan has experienced "a surprising and troubling resurgence" in the U.S., which I take it to mean that nationwide KKK membership is now approaching double digits. Liberal Jews seem to be blithely unaware that the singular threat to Jews at the moment is the complete annihilation of Israel. Why won't they focus on the genuine threat of Islamo-fascism and leave poor old Robert Byrd alone?

The ADL goes around collecting statements from Democrats proclaiming their general support for Israel, but it refuses to criticize Democrats who attack Joe Lieberman for supporting the war and who tolerate the likes of former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.

Sure, Hillary will show up at an ADL dinner and announce that she supports Israel. And then she gets testy with Bush for talking about sanctions against Iran in too rough a tone of voice.

What does it mean for the ADL to collect those statements?

The survival of Israel is inextricably linked to the survival of the Republican Party and its evangelical base. And yet the ADL viciously attacks conservatives, implying that there is some genetic anti-Semitism among right-wingers in order to hide the fact that anti-Semites are the ADL's best friends -- the defeatists in Congress, the people who tried to drive Joe Lieberman from office, the hoodlums on college campuses who riot at any criticism of Muslim terrorists and identify Israel as an imperialist aggressor, and liberal college faculties calling for "anti-apartheid" boycotts of Israel.

The Democratic Party sleeps with anti-Semites every night, but groups like the ADL love to play-act their bravery at battling ghosts, as if it's the 1920s and they are still fighting quotas at Harvard.

Earlier this year, Rep. Virgil Goode Jr., R-Va., said "in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America."

The ADL attacked him, saying, "Bigots have always hid behind the immigration issue."

Like the noose hysteria currently sweeping New York City, liberals are always fighting the last battle because the current battle is too frightening.

Liberal Jews are on a collision course with themselves. They can't reconcile the survival of Israel with their conception of themselves as liberals. The liberal coalition has turned against them. Jews are out; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is in. The new king knows not Joseph.