Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    October 2024
    S M T W T F S
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘israel’

Bravo, Sir Paul!

Posted by Richard on September 16, 2008

Unlike many of his countrymen, Paul McCartney isn't cowed by radical Islamists:

Despite several threats by extremists, Paul McCartney has refused to cancel an upcoming concert in Israel. He will go ahead with a gig in honour of the country's 60th anniversary.

"I do what I think and I have many friends who support Israel," McCartney told Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth this weekend.

His comments come in response to a Sunday Express interview with the militant Islamic activist Omar Bakri Muhammad. "If he values his life Mr McCartney must not come to Israel," said Bakri, who has been barred from returning to the UK. "He will not be safe there. The sacrifice operatives will be waiting for him."

"The sacrifice operatives" — that's Islamofascist-speak for "lunatic Islamist suicide-bombing murderers." I'm betting that they can't get past Israeli security.

Good for Sir Paul. I always liked him best.

HT: Instapundit

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama bombs in Israel

Posted by Richard on July 23, 2008

Dems in Israel for McCainThe MSM are ignoring or downplaying it, of course, but Barack Obama is not well-liked in Israel and is having a difficult time there. Hecklers challenged his stand/straddle/waffle on Jerusalem during his Wailing Wall visit. Democrats for McCain seemed to outnumber Obama supporters.

During a visit to the Yad Vashem Memorial, Obama was asked twice for assurances that there would be no second holocaust on his watch, and he wouldn't answer.

He was also caught lying saying something inartful about his role in the Senate:

"Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon."

Not only is it not his committee, but he's not even a member. And he had nothing to do with the bill. 

UPDATE (7/24): It gets even better. According to Power Line (via Gateway Pundit), last fall Obama opposed a similar amendment to impose sanctions on Iran (emphasis added):

During the run-up to the primaries, Senator Obama did not appear in the Senate to vote on the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment calling on the government to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist entity and thus suffer the imposition of sanctions. On the day of the vote on the amendment, however, Obama issued a statement announcing that he would have voted against it. In the statement, the closest he came to addressing the merits of the amendment was his assertion that "he does not think that now is the time for saber-rattling towards Iran." The amendment passed the Senate 76-22 on September 26, 2007, with many Democrats including Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Richard Durbin, and Chuck Schumer voting in its favor.

I guess he could argue that September wasn't the time for "saber-rattling," but July (when he's visiting Israel) is. 

Gateway Pundit has all this and more. There must be almost ten posts just about Obama in Israel, with scores of older posts about previous stops. Don't worry about the links to specific posts above, just go to the main page and keep reading — it's your one-stop source for all the Obama trip info that doesn't make it to the evening news. 

Ehud Olmert seemed to get along well with Obama. But then, he's the corrupt, cowardly leader who engineered the release of Samir Kuntar, a brutal and savage child killer and proud Islamofascist, in exchange for the mutilated bodies of two Israelis, hoping it would further the "peace process" and give "closure" to the families of the dead Israelis. Thus teaching these barbarians that they can torture and kill their captives and still use their remains as bargaining chips.

That's Kuntar below, getting a hero's welcome from his Hezbollah buddies in Lebanon. Disgusting beyond belief.

Sami Kuntar

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

Cease-fire “breached” by Hamas attacks

Posted by Richard on June 26, 2008

[Updated Wednesday evening] 

The "cease-fire" that Israel negotiated with Hamas (in exchange for what?) has been "breached" by rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel. What a surprise.

Of course, the cease-fire won't be officially broken (according to al-Reuters and al-AP) until Israel retaliates.

As long as the corrupt and cowardly Ehud Olmert is in control, that may be a while. 

UPDATE: Well, that didn't take long, and Israel didn't even have to physically retaliate:

Hamas: Closing crossings breaks truce
By JPOST.COM STAFF AND AP

The IDF on Wednesday closed Gaza's cargo crossings in response to the previous day's Kassam rocket attacks that violated the truce between Israel and Gaza terrorists.

The IDF said all crossings had been closed except for the Erez pedestrian terminal.

The truce began six days ago, and on Sunday, Israel began incrementally increasing the amount of goods entering Gaza.

Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said Wednesday's closure violated the cease-fire and another Hamas spokesman, Taher Nunu, called on Egypt, which mediated the truce, to intervene. "We will not accept leaving our people hostages to this policy," said Nunu.

If closing a border crossing violates the cease-fire, what about firing rockets at Israel? Hamas dismissed that, saying they weren't responsible, and made it clear that you'll never see "Hamas holding a rifle in the face of a resistance fighter."

Just how weak and cowardly is Olmert? If this story can be believed, he equated Israel striking back when attacked with "aggression" and promised not to do it: 

Meanwhile, Al-Kabas reported that Israel had assured Egypt that it would refrain from responding militarily to Tuesday's Kassam attacks.

The Kuwaiti newspaper quoted "well informed" Egyptian sources as saying that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made the guarantee to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak during their meeting in Sharm e-Sheikh Tuesday. Olmert reportedly said that Israel would not carry out any "aggression" in the event that one of the Palestinian factions violates the terms of the truce.

If that's true, it's utterly contemptible. When will the citizens of Israel rid themselves of this slug? 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The truth about Israel and the Palestinians

Posted by Richard on May 9, 2008

This, the 60th anniversary of Israel's Declaration of Independence, is an appropriate time to counter some of the falsehoods about how the current situation came to be — falsehoods that the Palestinians and their many sympathizers and apologists have so successfully promoted. The Terrorism Awareness Project has two excellent resources I commend to you wholeheartedly.

The first is a Flash movie entitled What Really Happened In the Middle East that's a terrific short history lesson (less than ten minutes). It refutes the most oft-repeated lies about Israel and the Palestinians, and it does so in a clear, direct, and riveting manner. Watch it. Then tell your friends to watch it.

The second is a fine essay by Steven Plaut, "How 'Nakba' Proves There's No Palestinian Nation." The enemies of Israel refer to its founding in 1948 as the "nakba" — or "catastrophe" — and tell a fable about the 1948 origin of the term. Plaut described a much earlier use of the term, citing a thoroughly biased source for his account — the 1938 book The Arab Awakening by George Antonius, a rabid anti-Zionist and Arab nationalist. The real origin of "nakba" had nothing to do with Jews, Israel, or Palestinian self-determination:

Before World War I, the entire Levant – including what is now Israel, the "occupied territories," Jordan, Lebanon and Syria – was comprised of Ottoman Turkish colonies. When Allied forces drove the Turks out of the Levant, the two main powers, Britain and France, divided the spoils between them. Britain got Palestine, including what is now Jordan, while France got Lebanon and Syria.

The problem was that the Palestinian Arabs saw themselves as Syrians and were seen as such by other Syrians. The Palestinian Arabs were enraged that an artificial barrier was being erected within their Syrian homeland by the infidel colonial powers – one that would divide northern Syrian Arabs from southern Syrian Arabs, the latter being those who were later misnamed "Palestinians."

The bulk of the Palestinian Arabs had in fact migrated to Palestine from Syria and Lebanon during the previous two generations, largely to benefit from the improving conditions and job opportunities afforded by Zionist immigration and capital flowing into the area. In 1920, both sets of Syrian Arabs, those in Syria and those in Palestine, rioted violently and murderously.

On page 312 of The Arab Awakening, Antonius writes, "The year 1920 has an evil name in Arab annals: it is referred to as the Year of the Catastrophe (Am al-Nakba). It saw the first armed risings that occurred in protest against the post-War settlement imposed by the Allies on the Arab countries. In that year, serious outbreaks took place in Syria, Palestine, and Iraq." 

So, rather than symbolizing the crushing of Palestinian aspirations for a state, the term "nakba" instead proves they never had such aspirations — until they wanted to justify their desire to wipe out the Jews. Read the whole thing. But I can't resist one more excerpt:

Speaking of Palestinians as Syrians, it is worth noting what one of the early Syrian nationalists had to say. The following quote comes from the great-grandfather of the current Syrian dictator, Bashar Assad:

"Those good Jews brought civilization and peace to the Arab Muslims, and they dispersed gold and prosperity over Palestine without damage to anyone or taking anything by force. Despite this, the Muslims declared holy war against them and did not hesitate to massacre their children and women…. Thus a black fate awaits the Jews and other minorities in case the Mandates are cancelled and Muslim Syria is united with Muslim Palestine."

That statement is from a letter sent to the French prime minister in June 1936 by six Syrian Alawi notables (the Alawis are the ruling class in Syria today) in support of Zionism. Bashar's great-grandfather was one of them.

I wonder what Assad would say today about his pro-Zionist great-grandpa. I wonder what the Middle East would be like if the views of the Alawis in 1936 had become more widely accepted, instead of the pro-Nazi views of men like Haj Amin al Husseini and Sami al Joundi.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Happy 60th, Israel!

Posted by Richard on May 8, 2008

In the Hebrew calendar, May 8 is 3 Iyar, 5768, and Yom HaAtzma'ut — Israel Independence Day. Sixty years ago (it was May 14, 1948, in the Western calendar), the British lowered their flag and withdrew from Palestine, and the Jewish community, led by David Ben Gurion, declared the independence of the state of Israel:

The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and national identity was formed. Here they achieved independence and created a culture of national and universal significance. Here they wrote and gave the Bible to the world.

Exiled from Palestine, the Jewish people remained faithful to it in all countries of their dispersion, never ceasing to hope and pray for their return and the restoration of their national freedom.

Accordingly, we, the members of the National Council, representing the Jewish people in Palestine and the Zionist movement of the world, met together in solemn assembly today, the day of the termination of the British Mandate over Palestine, by virtue of the natural and historic right of the Jewish people and the Resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations, hereby proclaim the establishment of the Jewish State in Palestine to be called Israel.

For 57 years (until the Iraqis adopted a democratic constitution on Dec. 15, 2005), Israel was the only democratic state in the Middle East. It's far from perfect, and far too socialist from my perspective. But its 60-year history is a remarkable and uplifting story. The Israelis have indeed made the desert bloom, and they've created a modern society full of world-class science, technology, business, and industry out of nothing. They achieved this despite their lack of natural resources, socialist tendencies, and a crushing defense burden because — unlike their neighbors — they embrace Reason and the Enlightenment.

The population of Israel is about 7.3 million, and almost 1.5 million of them are Arabs. Those Arab citizens of Israel have more freedom, opportunity, and human rights than the citizens of any of its Arab neighbors.

Happy birthday, Israel! Please join me in signing the world's largest virtual birthday card to honor this occasion. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Palestinians aren’t that crazy

Posted by Richard on January 7, 2008

Reading news stories about Israel and the Palestinians, or looking at clips from Palestinian TV at MEMRI or LGF, it's easy to develop a very pessimistic attitude and to generalize that the people I've called "paleostinians" are almost universally Jew-hating, murderous, barbaric, and completely irrational.

Well, the belief that Jews are subhuman seems to be pretty universal, and there's certainly far too much murderousness and barbarism. But according to Daniel Pipes, most Israeli Arabs aren't all that irrational — they'd rather be governed by the Jewish "dogs and pigs" than by the Palestinian Authority. That's become especially clear since Ehud Olmert suggested in October that maybe parts of East Jerusalem could be transferred to the PA:

Indeed, Olmert's musings prompted some belligerent responses. As the title of a Globe and Mail news item puts it, "Some Palestinians prefer life in Israel: In East Jerusalem, residents say they would fight a handover to Abbas regime." The article offers the example of Nabil Gheit, who, with two stints in Israeli prisons and posters of "the martyr Saddam Hussein" over the cash register in his store, would be expected to cheer the prospect of parts of eastern Jerusalem coming under PA control.

Not so. As mukhtar of Ras Khamis, near Shuafat, Gheit dreads the PA and says he and others would fight a handover. "If there was a referendum here, no one would vote to join the Palestinian Authority. … There would be another intifada to defend ourselves from the PA."

Two polls released last week, from Keevoon Research, Strategy & Communications and the Arabic-language newspaper As-Sennara, survey representative samples of adult Israeli Arabs on the issue of joining the PA, and they corroborate what Gheit says. Asked, "Would you prefer to be a citizen of Israel or of a new Palestinian state?" 62 percent want to remain Israeli citizens and 14 percent want to join a future Palestinian state. Asked, "Do you support transferring the Triangle [an Arab-dominated area in northern Israel] to the Palestinian Authority?" 78 percent oppose the idea and 18 percent support it.

Read the whole thing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Anniversaries

Posted by Richard on June 6, 2007

Today is the 63rd anniversary of D-Day. Noel Sheppard offered links to some commemorative videos and tribute posts. Justin Smith, noting that no one has spoken more eloquently on the subject, posted Reagan's 1984 Normandy speech. Go read the whole thing, but here's a brief excerpt of Reagan addressing the D-Day veterans (emphasis added):

The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next. It was the deep knowledge–and pray God we have not lost it–that there is a profound, moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.

You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One's country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.

Those words are all the more moving and poignant today, when many seem to have indeed lost what Reagan prayed we had not.

This week also marks the 40th anniversary of the Six Day War, which began on June 5, 1967. Charles Johnson linked to a remarkable historical document:

Reading TIME magazine’s account of the Six Day War, written in June 1967 shortly after it finished, is an amazing experience. The absence of cynicism and bias in this piece is a very marked contrast to the TIME magazine of today, and is a stark illustration of how deeply this magazine has gone wrong: The Quickest War.

And notice: not once are the Arabs who lived in the area referred to as “Palestinians.”

He's dead right. Just try to imagine the Time of today publishing this analysis (emphasis added):

Inevitably, the fact that so many Arab planes were trapped in their parking area-strung out wingtip to wingtip-suggested that Israel must have struck the first blow. The stunned Arabs, of course, said that it had, and Moscow angrily concurred. But, as Israel first told it, the Jewish jets scrambled only after early-warning radar picked up several waves of Arab planes headed straight for Israel. At the same time, a massive Egyptian armored column was reported to be rolling out of its base at El Arish and steering toward the Israeli border.

Historians may argue for years over who actually fired the first shot or dropped the first bomb. But the Realpolitik of Israel's overwhelming triumph has rendered the question largely academic. Ever since Israel was created 19 years ago, the Arabs have been lusting for the day when they could destroy it. And in the past month, Nasser succeeded for the first time in putting together an alliance of Arab armies ringing Israel; he moved some 80,000 Egyptian troops and their armor into Sinai and elbowed out the U.N. buffer force that had separated the antagonists for a decade. With a hostile Arab population of 110,000,000 menacing their own of 2,700,000, the Israelis could be forgiven for feeling a fearful itch in the trigger finger. When Nasser closed the Gulf of Aqaba, a fight became almost inevitable.

For an excellent account of the Six Day War with more historical perspective, read David Meir-Levi's FrontPageMag.com article. It also clearly explains how Israel's reviled "occupation of Palestine" actually came about (emphasis added):

A few days after the UN cease fire of 6/11/67, Abba Eban, Israel's representative at the UN, made his famous speech. He held out the olive branch to the Arab world, inviting Arab states to join Israel at the peace table, and informing them in unequivocal language that everything but Jerusalem was negotiable. Territories taken in the war could be returned in exchange for formal recognition, bi-lateral negotiations, and peace.

Israel wanted peace. Israel offered land in exchange for peace. As Lord Carendon, the UK representative at the UN, noted with considerable surprise after Abba Eban's speech, never in the history of warfare did the victor sue for peace — and the vanquished refuse.

Twice within a few weeks of the war's end, the USSR and the Arab Bloc floated motions in the UN General Assembly declaring that Israel was the aggressor. Both motions were roundly defeated. At that time, the world knew that the Arabs were the aggressors, and that Israel, victim of aggression, had sued for peace both before the war and after their amazing victory.

Unable to brand Israel the aggressor, and in disarray following Israel's public request for peace and reconciliation, The Arab world faced what for it was a difficult choice. Recognize Israel, negotiate for the return of conquered territories, and make peace…or not.

Rather than respond to Israel's invitation, the Arab states met in Khartoum, Sudan, for a conference in August, 1967. They unanimously decided in favor of the now famous three Khartoum "NO's": No recognition, No negotiation, No peace. This was only round 3. The Arab world could suffer many more defeats before its ultimate victory. Israel could suffer only one defeat. Better that Israel hold on to the territories taken in the war. Better that the refugees continue languishing in their squalor and misery. Better that the Arab states re-arm for round 4…than to recognize Israel's right to exist or negotiate toward a peaceful settlement of the conflict.

With the Khartoum "NO's", the Arab world forced Israel to unwillingly assume control over the approximately million Arabs living in the West Bank, Golan Heights, Sinai and Gaza Strip.

It's a shame and an outrage that an entire generation has never heard even a brief history of this war and how the current situation in the Middle East came about. It's utterly contemptible that a coalition of commies and 7th-century barbarians will commemorate the 40th anniversary of Israel's victory with a rally in Washington calling for its destruction. If you're anywhere near the District of Columbia (or NYC — there will be a bus), please join the Stand With Israel counter-rally.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 9 Comments »

Happy Independence Day, Israel!

Posted by Richard on April 23, 2007

Fifty-nine years ago, on May 14, 1948, the British lowered their flag and withdrew from Palestine, enabling the Jewish community, led by David Ben Gurion, to declare the creation of Israel. It's all reckoned by the Hebrew calendar, and this year it's offset a day to avoid starting Remembrance Day (the day before Independence Day, honoring fallen soldiers and victims of terror) during the Sabbath, so don't even try to make sense of the dates. The celebration officially began at 8 PM Monday with a torch-lighting ceremony at Mount Herzl in Jerusalem, and continues through Tuesday.

Ron Weiser of Australian Jewish News explained why this is a "chag sameach" (happy holiday) and also offered a reminder that, contrary to Arab propaganda, the Israelis aren't occupiers or interlopers newly arrived in the region:

Israel is surely the only nation on earth that inhabits the same land, speaks the same language and worships the same G-d that it did over 3000 years ago.

The people of modern-day Israel share the same language and culture shaped by Jewish heritage and religion and passed through generations, starting with the founding father Abraham.

This is a time for true celebration because we are proud of Israel's democracy, her dedication to human rights, her courts and justice, her free press, her high tech, her arts, her institutes of higher learning and most of all her Jewish core.

A country with over one million non-Jewish citizens who have more rights and freedoms – as they should than their brothers and particularly their sisters in Arab countries.

Immediately upon its Declaration of Independence, Israel was attacked by all its neighbors, who also urged the Palestinian Arabs to flee "temporarily" to escape the fighting. The Palestinian Arabs were promised they could soon return and claim the property of the Jews, who would be wiped out.

Despite the odds against it, Israel prevailed. It became the first free, democratic state in the Middle East. And for over 57 years (until the Iraqis adopted a democratic constitution on Dec. 15, 2005), it was the only democratic state in the Middle East. It's still by far the freest.

The descendants of the Palestinian Arabs who remained are now Israeli citizens, make up about 20% of the population, and have more political, social, and economic freedom than Arabs in any Arab nation (not that most of them are at all appreciative). The descendants of those who left "temporarily" until the Jews could be wiped out are still living in third-world "refugee camps" run by thugs and thieves — and still struggling to wipe out the Jews.

After 59 years of unrelenting violence and terror aimed against them, Israeli leaders are still trying to persuade their enemies to embrace peace:

Knesset Speaker and Acting President Dalia Itzik called Thursday on Israel's enemies to abandon the path of violence and seek the well being of their own societies.

"Our advice to you is replace your Katyushas and Qassams with computers and loving education, the smile of a boy that has a future, and neighborliness," Itzik said during her speech at the annual torch-lighting ceremony that kicked off Israel's 59th Independence Day celebrations at Mount Herzl in Jerusalem.

Itzik delivered the opening speech and lit the central torch. Israel's fifth president, Yitzhak Navon, also lit one of the 12 torches.

"We hear the sharpening of swords and voices of war from near and afar. In distant Iran, in nearby Syria, in the Palestinian Authority at out doorstep, there still reside fiery zealots of hate-ridden leaders that believe in their ability to harm the state of Israel," Itzik said in her speech, adding that "the citizens of Iran, Syria and the Palestinian Authority should think twice about why they are so thirsty for battles and blood.

"Isn't the blood that you have already spilled enough?" she asked.

More about Israel Independence Day:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The day the Americans leave Iraq

Posted by Richard on March 17, 2007

Abdallah Safialdeen, Hizbullah's representative in Iran, appeared on Iranian TV on March 4, 2007, and the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which operates the MEMRI TV Monitor Project, has a video clip and transcript. Safialdeen was crowing about how Hizbullah's "victory" in Lebanon set the stage for U.S. withdrawal from the region and the end of Israel:

Do you know what an American withdrawal from Iraq will mean? It will mean that Israel will lose its support. It will mean that the Lebanese Hizbullah will not need a large-scale war in order to enter Palestine. Hizbullah will be able to simply walk into Palestine. Rest assured that the day the American forces leave Iraq, the Israelis will leave the region along with them. What was one of the reasons for Olmert's recent visit to America? He went there in order to say to the Democrats: "Don't say that the American army will leave Iraq, because this would mean the annihilation of the Zionist regime." This is because the annihilation of the Zionist regime has begun. Like some of our friends say, Palestine is no longer a problem for us, because the Americans will be forced to leave Iraq. With or without a war against Iran, they will be forced to do so. The moment they leave Iraq, you, the Muslims of the world, can walk into Palestine, because Israel will no longer exist.

Do all the Jews out there who are still liberal Democrats have any questions? 

HT: American Congress for Truth  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The 1930s again

Posted by Richard on February 16, 2007

I don’t really know why this subject tears me up so much emotionally, but it does. I’m an atheist with no particular attraction to Judaism. I’ve certainly had plenty of Jewish friends, but that doesn’t explain why the threat to Israel, the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe, and related stories disturb me so very, very deeply.

Maybe, perversely, it has something to do with my pure Aryan (German-Austrian) heritage — my uncle Günther was a Luftwaffe pilot who died in WWII. Maybe the fact that I’m somehow connected to the "other side" weighs on me in some weird, irrational way. Whatever… I read stuff like the following, and I just start trembling and the tears flow. I don’t want there to be another shoah — holocaust. And I’m afraid that it may happen.

Thanks to Solomon for pointing out Charles Jacobs’ moving column. Like Sol, I’ll present the whole thing. If you’re Jewish or have ties in the community, please help with the Shabbat on the Iranian Threat. If you’re not, do something else — even if it’s just some small effort to express concern and raise awareness, like this post. Let Jacobs tell you why:

It’s the 1930s for U.S. Jews

By Charles Jacobs – Thursday February 15 2007

Half the world’s Jews are in the crosshairs of the Persian anti-Semite soon to have a nuke. Like his German predecessor, Ahmadinejad has a plan to annihilate millions. This time every Jew on the planet knows it. This time, can they act to stop it?

American Jews, far less powerful in the 1930s than today, were late to use what little power they had to scream the world awake. Looking back, world Jewry adopted a motto that in part defines them against that failure: “Never Again.”

But “Again” now looms, and Jews here are about to relearn a lesson: to speak up has a cost. Experts say Americans are concerned about Iran, but when they about Iran from Jews, they become suspicious.

Anti-Zionist intellectuals have revived the “dual loyalty” accusation with a vengeance. The infamous Walt-Mearsheimer paper, soon to become a lucrative book, claims disproportionate Jewish influence over American foreign policy was used to the benefit of Israel and to the detriment of “real” American interests.

The accusation that Jews tricked America into the Iraq war for Israel’s sake is not new. “The Jews,” it will be added, now drive America to attack nuclear Iran. “The Jewish community is divided, but there is so much pressure from the New York money people to the office seekers," is how former general Wesley Clark put it.

The problem faced 65 years ago repeats: Will Jewry here risk its position to help Jews targeted for death overseas?

On moral grounds there is no question: Jews dare not be silent about the Iranian threat. But there is a practical issue that cannot be ignored. What if by raising their voices, Jews hurt this cause? Suppose people would become less convinced about Iran because it’s Jews who are protesting? A real predicament that Jews will have to overcome.

Surely there are non-Jews equally concerned about nuclearized Muslim messianics; Iran poses a threat not just to Israel but to all of the West.

But Bush-hatred and anger over the Iraq war drives so much of American politics. Never mind that Israelis, focused for a decade on Iran, warned America about the negative consequences of attacking Iraq. Facts don’t matter. Everything Bush believes will be contested whether it’s “Iran is lethal” or “the Earth is round.”

Irrationality reigns. The only folks likely to scream along with the Jews about Iran are Republicans, neo-cons, Evangelicals and conservatives: The same groups that evoke hatred in America’s opinion elite. Even if Jews join a coalition of the rationally fearful, the cry will not fade that “the Jews” push for war with Iran.

Meanwhile in Boston, “The Emergency Committee on the Iranian Threat,” launched a Web campaign: Shabbat on the Iranian Threat. They call on American rabbis to speak about Iran to their congregations on the days before Purim (March 2-3), the Jewish holiday celebrating the escape by Persian Jewry from annihilation by another Persian leader centuries ago.

Bring two gregors (noise makers).

Never again, dammit. Never again.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Retaliation threatens cease-fire!

Posted by Richard on December 27, 2006

It was just about a month ago that Reuters redefined "cease-fire" to mean, as Tammy Bruce put it, "when Israel stops defending herself." So, for the past 30-odd days, the Paleostinians in Gaza have fired Kassam rockets at Israeli towns at an average of two a day, and the Israelis haven’t responded — and this constituted a successful on-going "cease-fire."

But now, the Israelis have said they’ll target the Kassam rocket launchers with "pinpoint" strikes — and this "threatens" the "cease-fire"! The Paleostinians may be feuding savagely amongst themselves, but they all seem to agree that the "cease-fire" can survive only as long as the Israelis refrain from hitting back:

Palestinians warned Wednesday that Israel’s decision to target Kassam cells in the Gaza Strip will lead to the total collapse of the current cease-fire.

Abu Ahmed, a spokesman for the Al-Quds Brigades, the armed wing of Islamic Jihad, said his group would continue to fire rockets at Israel as long as the cease-fire is not extended to the West Bank.

"Israel is continuing to perpetrate daily massacres against our people in the West Bank," he claimed. "We have the right to respond to these attacks. In the next few days we will increase our rocket attacks on Israel."

Fatah’s armed wing, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, also threatened to resume terror attacks if Israel launches attacks on Palestinians who fire rockets at Israeli cities. "Israel’s threats will destroy the cease-fire," the group said in a statement issued in Gaza City.

PLO executive committee member Yasser Abed Rabbo, who also serves as an advisor to Abbas, warned that the Israeli decision would lead to the breakdown of the cease-fire. He described the decision to target Kassam launchers as a "breach" of the cease-fire agreement and called on the Israeli government to reconsider its decision.

At LGF, Charles Johnson noticed that the Associated Press has also adopted the Reuters definition of "cease-fire":

In the Bizarro world of the Associated Press, Palestinians can fire rockets into Israel every single day, yet the “truce” is only “derailed” when Israel decides to defend against the attacks: Israel threatens to renew attacks.

JERUSALEM – After weeks of restraint, Israel said Wednesday that it will renew attacks on rocket-launching militants in the Gaza Strip, threatening to derail an already shaky, month-old truce.

Nice phrasing; Israel “threatens to renew attacks.” The Palestinians, on the other hand, can’t “renew” their attacks because they never stopped.

But AP’s reporting is more sinister than Bizarro. Compare the AP story with the quotes of Paleostinian leaders in the JPost article above and it becomes clear that the Associated Press has adopted the Paleostinian talking points.

The next time you read an AP or Reuters news report from the Middle East, just remember that, for all intents and purposes, you’re reading an Islamofascist press release with the language toned down to suit Western sensibilities.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Murdering their own children for a change

Posted by Richard on December 13, 2006

In a new twist for a sick culture, Palestinians are now murdering their own children instead of Israeli children. Captain Ed recalled Golda Meir’s famous prediction and noted how it relates to this new development:

Golda Meir once said, "Peace will come only when the Palestinians love their children more than they hate Jews." Unfortunately, Hamas has apparently decided that they hate Palestinian children almost as much as the Jews — if the children belong to Fatah officials. …

Even by Palestinian standards, the deliberate targeting of children for assassination goes beyond the pale — well, unless we’re talking about Israeli children. The Israelis have seen a number of their children murdered in attacks on school buses and on streets by Palestinian terrorists. The outrage and revulsion felt by the Palestinians at this assassination demonstrates the monstrous hypocrisy of terrorists.

That being said, this really marks a new low by either side. They have reversed Meir’s well-known standard to show their contempt for their own future by murdering their own children. In this case, they have gone beyond the last-ditch, seed-corn approach of arming their children to considering them fair game for hostilities, armed or not. For a culture that has set previous records in cowardice in their repeated attacks on civilians, this represents the nadir of the Palestinian experience.

I’m not surprised — either by the barbaric targeting of these three kids or by the contemptible hypocrisy of those who now mourn and wail and protest these murders, but in the past cheered the machine-gunning of Israeli schoolchildren and the bombing of Israeli schoolbuses and pizza parlors. And if I were the good Captain, I’d be careful about declaring anything as "the nadir of the Palestinian experience." Every time you think these people can’t possibly become any more barbaric, monstrous, and evil — they prove you wrong.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Alternate reality

Posted by Richard on December 8, 2006

One little excerpt from the Iraq Surrender Group report told me everything I needed to know about it and confirmed the fears and suspicions I had: "No country in the region wants a chaotic Iraq." Ahem. In what alternate reality do these tired old political reprobates reside? In this reality, Iran absolutely, positively does want a chaotic Iraq, and is working 24/7 to create one! And it’s client, Syria, is doing its share!

There is more wisdom, insight, judgment, and sense of history in the head of one young American soldier than in the entire preening, self-congratulatory, self-aggrandizing Baker-Hamilton commission — as evidence, consider the reaction of T.F. Boggs, a 24-year-old Sergeant in the Army Reserve who returned from his second tour in Iraq just last month (emphasis added):

The Iraq Survey Group’s findings or rather, recommendations are a joke and could have only come from a group of old people who have been stuck in Washington for too long. The brainpower of the ISG has come up with a new direction for our country and that includes negotiating with countries whose people chant “Death to America” and whose leaders deny the Holocaust and call for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth. Baker and Hamilton want us to get terrorists supporting countries involved in fighting terrorism!

What the group desperately needed was at least one their members to have been in the military and had recent experience in Iraq. The problem with having an entire panel with no one under the age of 67 is that none of them could possibly know what the situation is actually like on the ground in Iraq. …

We cannot appease our enemies and we cannot continue to cut and run when the going gets tough. As it stands in the world right now our enemies view America as a country full of queasy people who are inclined to cut and run when things take a turn for the worse. Just as the Tet Offensive was the victory that led to our failure in Vietnam our victories in Iraq now are leading to our failure in the Middle East. How many more times must we fight to fail? I feel like all of my efforts (30 months of deployment time) and the efforts of all my brothers in arms are all for naught. I thought old people were supposed to be more patient than a 24 year old but apparently I have more patience for our victory to unfold in Iraq than 99.9 percent of Americans. Iraq isn’t fast food-you can’t have what you want and have it now. To completely change a country for the first time in it’s entire history takes time, and when I say time I don’t mean 4 years.

Talking doesn’t solve anything with a crazed people, bullets do and we need to be given a chance to work our military magic. Like I told a reporter buddy of mine: War sucks but a world run by Islamofacists sucks more.

HT: Hugh Hewitt, whose assessment of the report is spot-on, including an apt historical comparison:

The report combines an almost limitless condescension towards the "Iraqi sovereign government," even going so far as to lay out a timetable for its exact legislative program for the next six months, with a cavalier indifference to the Syrian death squads operating in Lebanon, and the certain nature of the Iranian regime –still, on this very day, hosting the anti-Holocaust conference.

It is a wonder, this bit of appeasement virtuosity, and I think it will gain for its authors all the lasting fame that has attached itself to the name Samuel Hoare, and his brainchild, the Hoare-Laval Agreement.

I think Dean Barnett may have correctly identified the mindset of these morons:

Yesterday, the self-esteem movement reached its zenith. A nation and a government, eager to feel better about themselves, rounded up a passel of political has-beens to offer policy prescriptions that we could all support. And, other than the brain-dead nature of its policy prescriptions, what’s there not to love about the Iraq Study Group’s report? It’s the foreign policy equivalent of “a chicken in every pot.”

If this vacuous and venal piece of tripe isn’t dismissed and ignored — if its policy recommendations are actually followed, and the United States commits itself to appeasing terror states into being a bit nicer — then a few short years from now, when the nuke takes out Tel Aviv, we should refer to it as the Baker-Hamilton Holocaust.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

It’s not realism, it’s capitulation

Posted by Richard on November 28, 2006

Last week, I said I was "displeased and disgusted" by signs that the Bush administration is preparing to abandon its visionary foreign policy and embrace the Kissingerian realpolitik of Bush 41 pragmatists like James Baker and Robert Gates, by the prospect of dumping Sharansky for Scowcroft. New hints and leaks and off-record remarks suggest that the Iraq Study Group will indeed push us in that direction. And a chorus of voices from Capitol Hill to the United Nations is muttering about the need to "engage" the Syrians and Iranians.

In the new (12/04) Weekly Standard, Robert Kagan and William Kristol looked at this so-called "realism" and found it wanting:

So let’s add up the "realist" proposals: We must retreat from Iraq, and thus abandon all those Iraqis–Shiite, Sunni, Kurd, and others–who have depended on the United States for safety and the promise of a better future. We must abandon our allies in Lebanon and the very idea of an independent Lebanon in order to win Syria’s support for our retreat from Iraq. We must abandon our opposition to Iran’s nuclear program in order to convince Iran to help us abandon Iraq. And we must pressure our ally, Israel, to accommodate a violent Hamas in order to gain radical Arab support for our retreat from Iraq.

This is what passes for realism these days. But of course this is not realism. It is capitulation. Were the United States to adopt this approach every time we faced a difficult set of problems, were we to attempt to satisfy our adversaries’ every whim in order to win their acquiescence, we would rapidly cease to play any significant role in the world. We would be neither feared nor respected–nor, of course, would we be any better liked. Our retreat would win us no friends and lose us no adversaries.

OK, let’s tally that up: Stature of U.S. decreased — check. U.S. neither feared, nor respected, nor liked — check. U.S. gains no friends and loses no adversaries — check.

Kagan and Kristol made these points as if they were devastating critiques of the new "realism" — and for some of us, they are indeed. But for the Democrats, the "moderate pragmatists" like Baker, the Foggy Bottom internationalists, legions of Europeans, and fans of the United Nations everywhere, these consequences are at least tolerable and perhaps desirable.

HT to Neo-neocon, who noted that the Washington Post editors seemed to grasp the problems inherent in trying to reason with Syria and Iran, but fumbled the solution — the power of UN sanctions, she argued, "more closely resembles a small toothpick than a big stick."
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Reuters redefines cease-fire

Posted by Richard on November 27, 2006

Tammy Bruce nominated a Reuters story about a Gaza "cease-fire" as the most idiotic of the day yesterday:

Gaza truce takes hold despite rocket fire

How, on God’s green Earth, can you have a cease fire ‘take hold’ along with rocket fire?? Because, you see, a ‘cease-fire’ for Islamist terrorists and their sympathizers, like the UN and al-Reuters, is when Israel stops defending herself. Oh, and who is it that fired the rockets? That would be Hamas, from their terrorist camp called "the Gaza strip."

GAZA (Reuters) – A ceasefire between Israel and militants [sheesh] in Gaza took hold on Sunday and despite Palestinian rocket attacks in the first hours, Israel promised restraint.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the deal could help revive peacemaking [when are the Israelis going to dump this loser?] that collapsed six years ago before a Palestinian uprising began…

Why would terrorists want a cease-fire in the first place? To work on their statement recognizing the right of Israel to exist? To attend anger management classes? To draw up the fatwa declaring themselves the Great Satan? Or perhaps it’s to rest and re-arm. Gee, I wonder which it is

Sigh. In Israel, Olmert seems to be channeling Yitzhak Rabin. Here in the U.S., Baker appears ready to play Henry Kissinger and propose some variation of "peace with honor" (a.k.a. "defeat") for Iraq. It’s not a happy time for those of us who think Islamofascism is a serious threat to Western Civilization.

I wonder how many rockets and missiles it will take to convince the Israeli left that continuing to "extend the hand of friendship" to the PA is suicidal.

I wonder if our "exit strategy" from Iraq will eventually lead to jerky video footage of desparate Iraqis clinging to the last departing American helicopters.
 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »