|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:31 PM PDT
I was watching MSNBC with my father. My father voted for Obama and is a liberal (he was in a car accident last week after renting a FIAT). He started rubbing my face in the fact that there were not enough minorities being represented. Little did I know that we were viewing an edited version of events.
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow
(times247.com) One of the left’s favorite attacks on the Republican Party is that it is the party of old white people, devoid of diversity and probably racist.
If you were watching MSNBC’s coverage of the Republican National Convention in Tampa on Tuesday night, you might believe those assertions, since missing from the coverage was nearly every ethnic minority that spoke during Tuesday’s festivities.
In lieu of airing speeches from former Democratic Rep. Artur Davis, a black American; Mia Love, a black candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Utah; and Texas senatorial hopeful Ted Cruz, a Latino American, MSNBC opted to show commentary anchored by Rachel Maddow from Rev. Al Sharpton, Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Chris Hayes and Steve Schmidt.
 |
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:03 PM PDT
 (Pamela Geller)It's funny (/not) how the art world fashions itself as cutting edge, outside-the-box, brave culture warriors when in fact they step an fetch it for Islamic supremacists and leftist totalitarians.
Lars Vilks er endnu engang endt i et stormvejr. Foto: Stigake Jensson/AP They should have been 17, now there are 5 artists back in Swedish exhibition. 17 Swedish artists should have presented their works at the exhibition "The pr & Jämt" on länsmuseet Jamtli in Östersund from 30 September. But at present there are only five artists left who want their art on display at Jamtli. The reason is the controversial artist and cartoonist Lars Vilks. Is no longer welcome Vilks, who among other things is known to have drawn the Prophet Mohammed as a dog, was selected to participate in the exhibition with a video installation.( MORE)
Wow do I know about this kind of thing
|
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:41 AM PDT
|
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 07:44 AM PDT
STOCKHOLM — James Bond is causing a ruckus in Sweden.
Sweden’s prime minister has urged the heads of government agencies to control their spending on staff parties after the SAPO security service admitted it held a James Bond-themed bash for 4.3 million kroner ($650,000).
Sweden really is living in a fiction
|
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 05:49 AM PDT
 ( Elder of Ziyon) There is an interesting detail in this 2003 article from a local Olympia, Washington newspaper that profiles a number of Evergreen College students who traveled to Rafah along with Rachel Corrie:
Rafah is one of the most dangerous places in the Gaza Strip--"a combat zone," according to Captain Jacob Dallal, the Israeli army spokesperson.
...My Jewish ass has been to Israel several times, but never to Gaza, and I am a bit scared. I have been told not to use any of my Arabic, lest I be suspected of being an Israeli spy. Above all, I have been told not to mention my religion.
[Corrie's] cohorts at ISM Rafah were an international group, with members from both Europe and the U.S. It was a young group--most people were under 30, and many were closer to 20. And it was a group that held the potential for romance--a Swedish ISMer named Stefan Villkatt would soon become Rachel's boyfriend.
...In addition to Stefan, there was Chris Allert, 31, also from Olympia, who joined the ISM in April 2002 after hearing about the intense fighting in the West Bank town of Jenin.
...There was Will Hewitt, 25, another Evergreen student who arrived in Israel around the same time as Rachel.
..And then there was Joe Smith, 21--yet another Evergreen student who, with his thick beard and red-checked kaffiyeh, looks like a better-fed, Palestinian-territory version of John Walker Lindh. Joe is from Kansas City, Missouri, and says he (like other Evergreen students) is getting independent study credit for his time in Rafah.
At the time, the US State Department had a travel warning against Americans going to Gaza.
If true, Evergreen College was rewarding students to go to a war zone and put their lives in danger.
(h/t Daled Amos via email)
The Geoduck Fight Song
words and music by Malcolm Stilson, 1971
Go, Geoducks go,
Through the mud and the sand,
let's go.
Siphon high, squirt it out,
swivel all about,
let it all hang out.
Go, Geoducks go,
Stretch your necks when the tide
is low
Siphon high, squirt it out,
swivel all about,
let it all hang out.
|
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 06:14 AM PDT
 http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/12106#.UDzQGcFlS6V
Now that the Judge Oded Gershon has ruled that the death ofRachel Corrie her own fault and an accident on the part of the IDF, if anyone thinks this affects the de-legitimization efforts of the IDF to protect the people of Israel or for the nation to protect itself from terrorists, they had better think again.
Judge Gershon, by allowing this publicity farce to be held at all, has unwittingly put Israel in a no-win situation by falling into the ISM’s publicity trap.
Had Judge Gershon thrown the case out of court and saved the Israeli taxpayer wasted time and money for a publicity stunt by the ISM, the Rachel Corrie circus might have finally ended. Now that the case is over, even though the IDF was exonerated and her death found to have been unintentional and an accident, the Rachel Corrie media hounds in the ISM, including her two parents who are making a career off her death rather than discouraging other parents from letting their children to go off to be cannon fodder for terrorist groups in the ISM, can continue their well-paid careers as champions for Hamas.
What Judge Gershon failed to grasp, in allowing the trial to go forth in the first place, is that the ISM will now claim the verdict a sham and try to indict Israel in the Hague for “war crimes”. The same charge in the Hague would have been brought had the IDF been found guilty, as the ISM would then insist on a tribunal to try Israel for war crimes anyway.
In order for matters such as the Corrie case to be presented to the Hague, it is required that the use of the courts in the country accused of such crimes be exhausted first. Now that the trial is over, the ISM groups that generated this farce will approach the Hague, claiming the Israeli court was biased and requesting a trial on war crimes charges.
Hence, Judge Gershon, by permitting this trial, instead of ending the matter, has only led Israel down the primrose path to being accused of war crimes by a kangaroo court of international judges, some of whom are from the most oppressive totalitarian regimes in the world. This is the same kangaroo court that found illegal the Security Fence that was set up to stop suicide bombers from entering Israel to murder Israelis.
Let me tell you about Rachel Corrie: When I visited Israel in 2010 when this trial first began, I brought with me a tape-recorded phone interview I had with ISM activist Joseph Carr, who allegedly was with Corrie when she was killed.
Carr actually used photoshop to create phony photos of Corrie standing in front of a bulldozer that were picked up by the wire services and later retracted. Carr was not called as a witness by the Rachel Corrie Foundation because this canard would have been shown in court.
In that phone interview, Carr described to me how he and Rachel Corrie, not long before her death, had actually walked out into a combat zone to retrieve the dead body of a Hamas terrorist in front of IDF soldiers, because Hamas terrorists had asked them to do so.
Carr described to me in the interview - that I furnished the IDF’s defense lawyers - how he and Corrie would advance bit by bit into the no man’s land, yelling that they were peace activists and unarmed, until they reached the body and picked it up.
I asked Carr if he was afraid at the time of being arrested by the IDF for doing such a thing and he replied, “No. Because we knew the Arab snipers would shoot them if they did.”
It’s all on the tape the government has. What it tells anyone with common sense is that Rachel Corrie knew that she was there to draw fire on IDF soldiers if they ever sought to move her. The IDF video of her being struck by the D9 bulldozer also shows she was not protecting a house, and that the ISM “witnesses” who claimed they were running alongside the bulldozer screaming for it to stop (including Carr who claimed this), were not there.
Rachel Corrie’s mother is a case in point. She appeared on radio in Santa Cruz, California, where she admitted Rachel had told her she had also retrieved the dead body of a terrorist from a weapons smuggling tunnel at one point. “I knew she was really doing something dangerous when she told me that”, she admitted in the interview.
Her daughter had written her about “the martyrs” who died fighting the Israelis and how they lacked the sophisticated weaponry of the IDF.
Did Cindy Corrie tell her daughter to come home and stop being a human shield for terrorists? No, absolutely not. Did she tour the US telling other parents not to send their sons and daughters to Gaza where they would be used by terrorists as human shields? No, she did not.
Later, when Cindy and Craig Corrie were kidnapped for ransom in Gaza by Palestinian terrorists at gunpoint, then released when her kidnappers realized their value for propaganda against the Jews, the elder Corries didn’t bat an eyelash and continued their new career as propagandists for the Palestinian terror groups, particularly Hamas.
Some moron in the US State Department made a statement that the Israeli court’s investigation of Rachel Corrie’s death was inadequate. The US State Department is also to blame for allowing ISM activists to get new passports with no problem when they are deported by the Israeli government so they can continually return to Israel and foment riots in Judea and Samaria.
A real investigation needs to be done to determine what the US State Department’s relationship with the ISM is, and its work as human shields for Arab terrorists. If the US State Department can arm and train a Palestinian army and then have the trainer, General Keith Dayton, say with a straight face the army may attack the IDF in two years if the Palestinians aren’t given a state, how difficult a stretch is it to ask what the State Department has had to do with ISM activities since the gang’s inception in 2002?
ISM co-founders Adam Shapiro and Huwaida Arraf were both low level State Department employees working in Jerusalem when the ISM was first created. In the US Congress, Representative Peter King’s commission on Homeland Security needs to investigate this issue. After this creation, the ISM created a network of movements on US campuses worthy of a Rico Statute investigation.
The death of a stupid (yes, that's the appropriate word) 23 year-old girl, who thought of herself as an anarchist and revolutionary and planted herself in front of a bulldozer in a combat zone because she figured the IDF soldiers inside the tractor would not emerge to move her for fear of being shot by Arab snipers, got an unexpected shock when the tractor, whose driver couldn't see her, accidentally ran over her.
For the Arabs her death was a propaganda bonanza that ultimately opened up the Rafah and Philadelphi Corridor to aid the Hamas regime in Gaza. Now the Hague will only put more pressure on Israel as the nation is falsely accused of war crimes because of this girl and her opportunistic parents, who will gladly make hay joining the bandwagon of de-legitimizers of Israel.
Anything for the ISM to keep the war roiling until - they hope - the end of the Jewish state.
Rachel Corrie just needs to go away, but watch as this next becomes a case accusing Israel of war crimes.
Meanwhile, maybe Israel is growing up, because almost on the same day this verdict came out, 109 ISM activists, more Rachel Corries, were finally turned away at the Allenby Bridge by an Israeli government that has been a fall guy to the ISM and their terrorist sponsors for the last 11 years.
But don’t expect the Rachel Corrie clown show to end with this investigation. Plan on Israel’s lawyers and foreign ministry to be tied up in the Hague for the next few years, while the threat from Iran looms ever closer.
|
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2012 06:02 AM PDT
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/middle_east_non-solutions.htmlThe mantra crops up almost everywhere . "You Israelis have two simple choices ," it goes. "You can either annex all of the 'occupied territories' and grant equal Israeli citizenship to all of the Palestinians there, in which case Israel will no longer be a Jewish state. Or you can agree to a two-state solution, in which Israel continues to exist alongside a Palestinian Arab state. Simple. Make your choice !" The posing of these two "choices" for Israel is part of the campaign to convince Israelis that there is no alternative to the "Two-State Solution." The first "alternative" is often dubbed these days the "One-State Solution" by its anti-Israel advocates. Israel and its Jewish population would be enfolded within a larger Arab-dominated Islamic state. A better term for this is the "Rwanda Solution." It is little more than a recipe for a second Holocaust of Jews, a Nazi-style final solution, in which the Middle East conflict would end because the Jewish population of the Middle East would be exterminated. But the "Two State Solution" is little better. The creation of a "Palestinian" state "alongside Israel" would not solve anything and would not end the conflict. To the contrary, it would be the opening round for a major escalation in the conflict and the launching of an all-out war by "Palestine" against the rump Jewish state -- a war in which "Palestine" would be joined and backed by the entire Arab world and much of the non-Arab Muslim world. Like rump Czechoslovakia after Munich, the remaining Jewish mini-state would be the target for aggression and irredentist belligerence, manifested in rocket and missile attacks. The thousands of rockets that were fired at Sderot and the Negev after the unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza will appear as a child's game by comparison. Let us note that neither the "One State " nor the "Two State" is a viable solution to the Middle East conflict. Neither would resolve anything. There is no two-state solution -- only a two-state "solution." There is also no such thing as a "One-State Solution," at least if one means by that the granting of Israeli citizenship to all those claiming to be "Palestinians." So how must Israelis respond to the diktat that they choose either the one or the other? They must answer neither. Israelis cannot formulate and propose "solutions" to the Middle East conflict for the exact same reason why the Western allies could not have proposed or formulated any "solution" to the ambitions of Germany in the late 1930s. No solution would have satisfied those ambitions, and none could have appeased Hitler. The quest in the 1930s for "solutions" resulted in years of delay, during which Germany re-armed and support for Hitler within Germany solidified. Similarly, no "solution" could have prevented the assaults against Pearl Harbor, Malaya, and the Philippines by Imperial Japan. The only solution to those conflicts was Western victory. In short, "solutions" are magical panaceas sought by lazy, shallow, and impatient minds. The entire Oslo "peace process" initiated by Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres was based upon the belief that peace can be achieved by pretending that war does not exist. Never mind what the Arabs are saying. The Middle East conflict also has nothing to do with territory. The Arab countries already control territory nearly twice that of the United States (including Alaska), while Israel is smaller than New Jersey. The architects of the "peace process" argued that possession of territory twice the size of the U.S. without the Everglades-sized West Bank is a recipe for endless war, but if Israel just turns that Everglades-sized zone over to the "Palestinians," all will be peaceful. Twenty-two sovereign Arab states have produced war and barbarism, but creating a 23 rdArab state as a "Two State Solution" will produce peace. Now, if Israelis refuse to embrace the above two pseudo-solutions, insists the left, then Israel will end up an "apartheid regime" -- one in which "Palestinian Arabs" live under endless Israeli "occupation" and control, but without Israeli citizenship, without the right to vote. It is always amusing to hear whining about the absence of the Palestinian right to vote in Israeli elections, especially when it comes from the very same people who do not care that Arabs have no free elections anywhere else in the Middle East. And never mind that Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is not an apartheid regime. Essentially, the insistence that Israel must choose one of the two pseudo-solutions or else it will morph into an "apartheid regime" amounts to the belief that Israelis are better off allowing their country to be annihilated rather than risk becoming the target of name-calling. In reality, the most productive way to seek to resolve the Middle East is to take as the starting point the list of what is ruled out, what must never be. No "solution" to the Middle East conflict is possible if it involves creation of an Arab "Palestinian" state, and none is possible if it involves "Palestinians" being granted Israeli citizenship. Both of these nonstarters must be ruled out absolutely. Once that is understood, any proposal based upon those two nevers can be taken into consideration. The immediate implication is that Israel must remain in the West Bank, and the "Palestinian" population there will be granted neither Israeli citizenship nor national sovereignty. The United States occupied Okinawa for decades, and American national historic and cultural roots did not originate in Okinawa. Indeed, American armed forces still fill that island. There is no time limit on how long Israeli "occupation" can last, and the very word "occupation" is actually a misnomer. In any case, the Israeli presence in the West Bank is sui generis and not comparable to any other case of "occupation." So if West Bank "Palestinians" will be granted neither Israeli citizenship nor national sovereignty, what can they be offered? The original "peace proposals" offered by Israel in the 1970s and 1980s spoke about limited local autonomy. Had the Palestinians played their cards right, they could have enjoyed as much freedom and prosperity under local autonomy as do Puerto Rica, Guam, and American Samoa. But the Israeli Labor Party lost patience with the idea after a few years and decided to frog-leap to a "Two State Solution." It imported Yasser Arafat's storm troopers into the suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and proclaimed its "recognition" of the "Palestinian people." There is indeed another "solution" for West Bank "Palestinians" unhappy with the two nevers defining conflict resolution. They can leave. There are those 22 sunny Arab states, plus lots of other Muslim states, whither any unhappy West Bank "Palestinian" can move and live amongst his kin. After all, Jews unhappy with life in Argentina, France, or Hungary demand not the annihilation of those countries, but merely the right to move to Israel. The fact that the "Palestinians" prefer Israeli "occupation" over blissful residence in these alternative countries speaks volumes about just how badly treated the "poor suffering Palestinians" really are. The "Palestinians" find these constraints on their options distasteful? Too bad! Part of adulthood means coming to terms with the fact that, as in Mick Jagger's words, "[y]ou can't always get what you want." What the "Palestinians" and their apologists want is the annihilation of Israel and a second Holocaust of Jews. And they are not going to get what they want.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment