Monday, 30 November 2009

Love of the Land: Bibi Versus The Iceman

Bibi Versus The Iceman


Obama and Bibi Netanyahu as battling SuperHeros : Dry Bones cartoon.


I thought that I'd draw Obama and Bibi Netanyahu as battling SuperHeroes, but they came out looking like a pair of phony costumed TV wrestlers putting on a show!

* * *

The Arab-Israeli conflict will end when the Arab states accept the existence of a Jewish State in the region as natural. Political correctness requires that we ignore this obvious truth and pretend that the problem is simply a border dispute between "Palestinians" and Israelis.



Love of the Land: Bibi Versus The Iceman

Shir Ha-Ma'alot #34

Shir Ha-Ma'alot #34


30
Nov
2009

"Let the loving couple be very happy, just as You made Your creation happy in the Garden of Eden."
From where do we know that Adam and Chava were happy in the Garden of Eden on their wedding? There is no explicit verse. They explain in yeshivot that there is no need for a verse, since it is logical. Why do I need a verse? It is a logical deduction! There was only one woman in the world, there was therefore no possibility of comparing, and the first man and woman were thus extremely happy. From the moment that a man is married, he should not look at another woman, think about another woman, compare with another woman, and then he will be joyous.
The truth is that one should act this way even before the marriage. It once happened that it was the custom in a particular place for the groom to give his bride a gift after the Chuppah. One groom did not give anything, because he was terribly poor, and he saved a small amount to pay for the wedding. The bride’s friends asked her where her gift was and they mocked her, the bride turned to her groom in tears: where is my gift? He responded to her: my gift is that you are the first woman in my life, the first woman that I look at and think about, talk with and laugh with, whom I love and dream about. Do not consider this a cheap gift. It was very costly for me, it was all the days of my youth. I am not sorry. This is my gift.
Why does the sixth of the ‘sheva brachot’ end with "Who makes the groom and bride happy" as opposed to the wording in the final blessing: "Who make the groom happy together with the bride"? Rashi explained that in our blessing, we give thanks to Hashem who causes the rejoicing of the groom and the bride, each of them on their own, that He will not withhold any good from them. But in the next blessing, we give thanks to Hashem "'Who created a wedding, joining of a man together with a woman with happiness and delight,' as a result it ends ‘Who makes the groom happy together with the bride’ which means the happiness of a man together with a woman" (Ketubot 8a).
Originally posted by Torat HaRav Aviner

Zionism - New or Old

Zionism - New or Old

[Sefer Al Diglo #32]

The definition of Zionism is not that we should make aliyah and establish settlements. This was done before the appearance of Zionism, and Jews throughout all generations, from all streams and from all paths, sacrificed their lives for this purpose. Zionism is not individuals who connect themselves to the Land of Israel. The definition of Zionism is the Nation returning to its Land, cleaving to its Land, awaking from the slumber of long exile and yearning for a National life. Zionism is a state and an army, sovereignty and a government. This Zionism returned in our days as in previous days before the Exile, as in the time of the Kingship of David.
Originally posted by Torat HaRav Aviner

DoubleTapper: Hannuka is coming

DoubleTapper: Hannuka is coming

Mondoweiss Doesn't Like Jews

Mondoweiss Doesn't Like Jews

Mondoweiss approves of those in the UK who dislike the presence of Jews on the Chilkot inquiry. (The issue is introduced here, for those who have forgotten). This puts Mondowiess on the antisemitic part of the discussion, though there could have been another explanation: that they are merely hyper-sensitive to matters of impartiality on panels. Wondering if that might be the case, I searched their site for mention of a previous famous case in which a panel included a person who had publicly made up her mind before even joining. (I'm not saying either of the two English-Jewish historians has done this, mind you. But perhaps Mondoweiss thinks they have).

Nope. The only mentions of Christine Chinkin at Mondoweiss are positive. Here and here. So that's not it.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Mussolini was an Antisemite

Mussolini was an Antisemite

When it came to the Jews, the Italian Fascists didn't hold a candle to their German allies. On the contrary, in Yugoslavia and France, high-ranking Italian fascist officials actively thwarted Nazi anti-Jewish policies. (I wrote a chapter about this in Hitler's Bureaucrats: The Nazi Security Police And The Banality Of Evil). Mussolini's role, however,has long been enigmatic.

Less so now, apparently. According to the diaries of his mistress, he was a racist, an antisemite, and proud of it all. This may not be definitive proof to shut down all discussion, but it's a serious source. Remember, the mistress, Clara Petacci, was lynched alongside Mussolini in 1945, so the diary reflects the man as seen at the time, without any sanitizing post-fact cleanups.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Czechoslovakia and Hungary

Czechoslovakia and Hungary

The Economist has two interesting book reviews, which are worth glancing at even if you won't buy the books.

The first review is of Mary Heimann's Czechoslovakia: The State That Failed. Accroding to the review, Heimann has documented that just about all the nice things we sort of generally "know" about Czechoslovakia and what a positive place it was, were wrong. It wasn't. Having read the review it occured to me that many of the specific points I'd heard of over the years, but never in a coherent way that might change the overall impression of what the country was about.

Well, maybe that's because Heimann's case is overstated, or so her reviewer thinks. But it still sounds very interesting.

Then there's the story of communist Hungary. It was ghastly - according to Enemies of the People: My Family's Journey to America, by Kati Marton. Even at the time there was no lack of misguided people in the West who refused to accept that for all its blemishes, it was simply superior in almost all things to the communist part of the world; the passage of time isn't making the incredulity any softer. Read the Guardian and you'll see. Anyway, the need to believe the worst about the democratic world as it faces far worse societies which are whitewashed is still one of the main political themes of our day.

This book sounds like a useful reminder that there can be truly evil regimes; if you don't have time for the book at least read the review.
Originally postd byYaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Friedman and the Narrative

Friedman and the Narrative

Thomas Friedman has garnered plaudits from the hawks for his most recent column:

The Narrative is the cocktail of half-truths, propaganda and outright lies about America that have taken hold in the Arab-Muslim world since 9/11. Propagated by jihadist Web sites, mosque preachers, Arab intellectuals, satellite news stations and books — and tacitly endorsed by some Arab regimes — this narrative posits that America has declared war on Islam, as part of a grand “American-Crusader-Zionist conspiracy” to keep Muslims down.

Yes, after two decades in which U.S. foreign policy has been largely dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny — in Bosnia, Darfur, Kuwait, Somalia, Lebanon, Kurdistan, post-earthquake Pakistan, post-tsunami Indonesia, Iraq and Afghanistan — a narrative that says America is dedicated to keeping Muslims down is thriving.

Although most of the Muslims being killed today are being killed by jihadist suicide bombers in Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Indonesia, you’d never know it from listening to their world. The dominant narrative there is that 9/11 was a kind of fraud: America’s unprovoked onslaught on Islam is the real story, and the Muslims are the real victims — of U.S. perfidy.

Sorry, but I'm not impressed. The narrative (or The Narrative) wasn't created after 9/11; it has been aimed at Israel and to a degree at America for many decades. A totally dishonest narrative about how Israel is the source of all evil in the Mideast has been the meta-narrative in the Arab world for generations; 9/11 was its result, not the other way around, because America is regarded as Jewish, or controlled by Jews.

Nor is this Arab pathology particularly novel. Europeans of the Left were convinced Jewish capitalists were behind all evil for the past 200 year, perhaps more, even as Europeans of the Right were convinced Marxism and all its spawns were cynical Jewish inventions. Read Voltaire and you'll be surprised how central the nefarious Jewish influences are that he identifies.

Need I mention the Christian ideas about the Jews and their roles in history and theology? Hardly savory, many of them.

Now I'm not saying hatred of Jews has always been universal, nor that it's the central plank of history. Not. But to look at the post-9/11 world and be surprised by the centrality and potency of antisemitic ideas and their derivatives seems, to me, a bit lightweight.

Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Levi and the Shrink

Levi and the Shrink

Gideon Levy, he of Haaretz, spent half an hour talking to a psychoanalyst on television. It's in Hebrew, and since it's video, I don't think Google can translate it for you.

Levy comes across as reasonable, calm, reflective, and articulate. Well, he's a talented journalist, so the articulate part is what you'd expect.

He tells how proud he is to aggravate us. His motivation is plausible: he has set himself the task of ensuring that we're never able to say "we didn't know" about our relationship with the Palestinians. Since he thinks we're profoundly wrong in that relationship, his second goal is to aggravate us. He admits that's a goal, the aggravation, which he achieves by using ever more extreme language. Strangely, he also tells that he can't stand it when outsiders criticize us - pretty weird, bearing in mind how important a source he is for Israel's haters.

Honesty doesn't get mentioned. Careful evaluation of facts, either.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Dershowitz vs. Goldstone

Dershowitz vs. Goldstone

I know, I said I'd stop talking about the Goldstone Report. Indeed, I've mostly stopped. Still, here's a link to Alan Dershowitz' encounter with Richard Goldstone. Oh, wait. After repeatedly alleging that no-one was reading his full report nor dealing with its content, even as the number of people doing so was rapidly growing, Goldstone declined the invitation to discuss his report publicly with Dershowitz. Apparently the meeting with Dore Gold was enough, especially as Dershowitz is a far more formidable public speaker than Gold. So Dershowitz spoke alone, with a copy of the Goldstone Report propped up alongside him.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations

Chester Chronicles - “I Hope the West Does Not Give In”: An Interview with Seyran Ates

Chester Chronicles - “I Hope the West Does Not Give In”: An Interview with Seyran Ates

RubinReports: The Obama Administration’s Giant Problem: How to Get the Palestinians to Negotiations without Pressure and Threats?

The Obama Administration’s Giant Problem: How to Get the Palestinians to Negotiations without Pressure and Threats?

[Please subscribe for original and real-time news and analysis]

By Barry Rubin

The Obama Administration now has a huge problem in its Israel-Palestinian policy about which no one is yet speaking. Since the White House lacks the stomach to deal with it the problem won't be evident for some time, except perhaps to the readers of these words.

Here’s the issue. It’s simple. It should be obvious: How is the Obama Administration going to get the Palestinians to the table now that Israel has proved itself flexible, ready for negotiations, and willing to make peace. Because, despite President Obama's claim in his Cairo speech that the Palestinian situation is "intolerable" and they are ready to do a deal, that just isn't true.

After eight months of back and forth, Israel has agreed to freeze construction on West Bank settlements. Despite the Administration’s earlier promise to get something for Israel from the Arab side in exchange for this concession, the White House failed completely.

The White House did issue a statement setting forth its own ideas for a peace agreement which, while asking big concessions of Israel also promises several very important things that Israel wants. (On this, see here). But skepticism is understandable: Will the Administration just keep taking away from what Israel gets by adding to what it gives the Palestinians hoping to appease the latter into negotiating seriously?

The bottom line, however, is this: The Obama Administration has run out of unilateral concessions it can demand from Israel. The Palestinian Authority (PA) still refuses to do anything. It merely whines, complains, and demands more. Every time Israel makes a concession, the PA says it is worthless. Now it is insisting, just as a start, that Israel also stop all construction in Jerusalem and make the freeze permanent.

To put it simply: A pressure Israel only policy won't work because Israel won't give any more and no matter of Israeli concessions will change PA policy any way. The PA will, following its pattern, argue: you got us this much, now get us some more.

So what is the Obama Administration going to do? To get the PA to talk it must either get more from Israel, which is unlikely, or—gasp!—pressure the PA.

In principle, the PA should be eager for talks. Obama believes that the Palestinians situation is "intolerable," so aren't they eager for progress? And also the PA owes Obama big-time. The United States pressures Israel on its behalf; gives it military training; diplomatic support; and lots of money. Obama has made speech after speech promoting their cause and exalting the Palestinians without any real criticism.

He could ask for concessions. He could demand concessions. He could pressure them for concessions.

And what’s the big concession? Come negotiate and get your state, which would be the same size as all the pre-1967 West Bank and Gaza Strip, plus billions of dollars in compensation payments, pretty please?

Yet it is hard to see this happening. Why? The traditional reason for not wanting to pressure the Palestinians is that US. governments thinks it must prove itself champion of their cause in order to gain backing from the Arab and Muslim world.

With the Obama Administration, however, there is something more. First, it hates to pressure anyone (or at least anyone except Israel). Second, it is less fond of Israel. Third, it sees itself as progressive and Third World in its orientation and thus has a horror of pushing anyone perceived to be on the “left” by the strange definitions prevailing today.

Then there’s still another problem. No matter what the Obama Administration does the PA will say, “No.” And then what will the White House do? Provoke an open rift; heated criticism; cutting off aid? Not a chance. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas might even, gasp!, threaten again for a week or two that he's going to resign.

Mind you, the PA leadership can’t give in even if it wants to do so because of internal politics. Abbas knows, too, that his colleagues will broil him if he makes concessions. We already saw how this works. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas promises Obama to hang back on pushing the Goldstone report. Even more radical PA leaders attack Abbas. Abbas gives in.

Also, never forget Hamas. Fear of Hamas, combined with hope that Hamas will make an alliance with itself, also keeps the PA from doing anything conciliatory. Does the Obama Administration really think it can make a permanent full peace agreement with a bunch of genocidal-intentioned Usama bin Ladin clones sitting over in the Gaza Strip? That’s a joke.

Then, too, the chickens are coming home to roost on the Obama Administration policy of being so determined not to scare anyone. If Abbas stubbornly refuses to do anything, he knows that Obama won’t do anything to him. Is he going to rush to go off to Camp David under these conditions? If this is going to happen at all the administration is going to have to spend about six months intensive effort on this project.
What’s left? Can the U.S. government go back to Israel and demand it stop building in Jerusalem in exchange for nothing? This will tear up a U.S.-Israel agreement just made, reducing American credibility to zero.

Remember that Israel has frozen construction for ten months. Will any progress be made, or the PA make any compromises, before that deadline expires? And having achieved nothing is the U.S. government going to demand an extension? (Probably, but will Israel give it one; and will the Administration, having failed to pressure the Palestinians or obtained any compromise from them really punish Israel for saying that the experiment had failed and it is returning to normal construction?)

So unless you hear about tremendous U.S. pressure on the PA to back down, setting off an angry anti-American reaction in Palestinian politics, don’t believe that the administration is serious about advancing the peace process. And if you do hear about such things, don't believe they will get anywhere.

RubinReports: The Obama Administration’s Giant Problem: How to Get the Palestinians to Negotiations without Pressure and Threats?

JNF Donates 3,000 Trees to Palestinian Authority - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

JNF Donates 3,000 Trees to Palestinian Authority - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Legal Appeal Against Freeze: 'Gov't Didn't Approve It' - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Legal Appeal Against Freeze: 'Gov't Didn't Approve It' - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Iran Flouts West With Plans to Build 10 New Uranium Plants - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Iran Flouts West With Plans to Build 10 New Uranium Plants - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Demjanjuk Holocaust Trial Begins in Munich - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Demjanjuk Holocaust Trial Begins in Munich - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Likud MK Danon: Stop Netanyahu But Don't Dump Him - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Likud MK Danon: Stop Netanyahu But Don't Dump Him - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Fear and Loathing in PA over Temple Mount Link to Jews - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Fear and Loathing in PA over Temple Mount Link to Jews - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

MK Leads Fight Against Noisy Muezzins - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

MK Leads Fight Against Noisy Muezzins - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Israel Matzav: 'Palestinian' in hiding after admitting Jewish connection to Temple Mount

'Palestinian' in hiding after admitting Jewish connection to Temple Mount

'Palestinian moderate' Sari Nusseibeh has gone underground after publishing an article in which he admitted that Jews have a connection to the Temple Mount.

Middle East expert Mordechai Kedar said Monday that Dr. Sari Nusaiba of Birzeit University, north of Ramallah, has had to go underground in the wake of an article that claims an historical connection between the Jews and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Interviewed on Arutz Sheva's Hebrew news journal, Dr. Kedar said that Nusaiba would not be the first prominent Arab to publicize the link.

Dr. Kedar said that Haj Amin El-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, declared in 1929 that the site's association with King Solomon's Temple was beyond all doubt, even though he would become part of the Nazis' efforts against the Jews.

Religion of peace, anyone?

Israel Matzav: 'Palestinian' in hiding after admitting Jewish connection to Temple Mount

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Overnight music video

Legend tells that after the Holocaust, R. Yosef Kahaneman zt'l , the Ponevezhe Rov began looking for Jewish children who had survived the war. It was known that some of the children had ended up in churches and were being raised as Christians. The Rov encountered one church that denied the existence and presence of Jewish children within their midst... He was granted permission to enter the children's quarters to inspect for himself -- when he entered he began calling out "Shema Yisroel" and instinctively many of the children raised their hands to cover their eyes and started calling out "mama! mama!"

Rav Kahaneman - who has a street named after him in just about every major city in Israel - saved hundreds of Jewish children in this manner.

The full Shema prayer is said twice daily in synagogue, and an abridged version is said soon after awakening in the morning and before going to sleep at night - a total of four times a day.

This song is by Yaakov Shwekey.

Let's go to the videotape.





Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Israel Matzav: Baer and Hanson: 50-50 Israel strikes Iran by end of 2010 Q1

Baer and Hanson: 50-50 Israel strikes Iran by end of 2010 Q1

Big Government brings us this interview with Robert Baer and Victor Davis Hanson in which an Israeli strike on Iran is a real scenario. Big Government comments.

Either “full of himself” doesn’t even begin to describe our president, or his speechwriters are literally in love with him – which would be cute, were it not so perilous.

Because the world watches. In Israel, they watch and they listen and they don’t like the way the “winds of change” are blowing. They feel america leaving them in the desert. In Europe, they listen and they must, if their ears are working, hear the news that America will no longer play the bad cop to their good cop. If Obama’s America, while dreaming of a world without nuclear weapons, allows Iran to attain the ability to strike German cities, what should the Europeans leaders do? Will the Germans build new weapons of their own? As this interview with two experts on the region reveals, circumstances are rapidly growing too dire to ignore.

Let's go to the videotape.



Unfortunately (and I say 'unfortunately' only because I appreciate the consequences), the odds of an Israeli strike on Iran are growing by the day. No one here is willing to die to keep the price of gas in the US at $2.70 per gallon while that Islamist-loving moron in Washington goes all over the world talking about himself and bowing on America's behalf. He makes Neville Chamberlain look like a brilliant statesman.

I don't give a damn if oil goes to $1,000 per barrel, so long as my family and I are able to live normal lives. Does anyone in Washington get that? Do the 60 Democratic Senators who can bring anything to a vote understand that no one here is willing to die so that they can back 'engagement' with Iran? Or are they still enamored with King Hussein? Do the foolish Jews in the House like Bob Wexler and Gary Ackerman really think Israel is going to take a hit for them?

But deep down, it's impossible to escape the feeling that this may be Iraq or Syria all over again. Will Iran really respond? That seems less real than us hitting them. (Hamas and Hezbullah will respond, but they're like flies compared with Iran). But if we don't hit them, it's clear that they will hit us. There is no choice. Israel will have to act. God will help us.


Israel Matzav: Baer and Hanson: 50-50 Israel strikes Iran by end of 2010 Q1

Israel Matzav: Netanyahu: Now it's clear who wants peace

Netanyahu: Now it's clear who wants peace

At the Eilat Journalism Conference on Sunday, Prime Minister Netanyahu said that now that we've agreed to strangle Judea and Samaria for the next ten months (at least), it's clear who wants peace.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the Eilat Conference for Journalism that it is now clear to every objective observer that Israel wants peace. He noted, however, that he does not see the same willingness or determination on the Palestinian side. "I see other signs. I see stipulating all kinds of preconditions to talks from the first moment," said Netanyahu.

Well, Netanyahu may be right, but we didn't need a freeze to tell us that, and there aren't too many objective observers in these parts. Take quartet envoy Tony Blair for instance. Please, take him.

Speaking to CNN's John King, the former UK prime minister said that there were "many things, positive things, happening on the ground at the moment." He specifically cited growth in the Palestinian economy in the West Bank, as well as the fact that checkpoints were being "opened or removed."

"There's a lot of bustle and activity on the West Bank and in Gaza," he noted.

...

He said that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was "genuine and serious in wanting negotiations [with the Palestinians] to start." On the Palestinian side, he said, people "need to know that negotiations are going to be credible," and that they will "genuinely lead to the two-state solution."

In other words, Blair says that the 'Palestinians' want 'peace' but only if Israel surrenders.

What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: Netanyahu: Now it's clear who wants peace

Israel Matzav: The magic number

The magic number

In a court filing on Sunday, the Israeli government disclosed the number of terrorists it is willing to trade for kidnapped IDF corporal Gilad Shalit: 980.

In a response to a petition seeking to publish the names of the Palestinians prisoners slated to be released as part of the Shalit deal, the State Prosecutor's Office stated that the release of 450 prisoners is being considered.

It was also stated, "As part of a unilateral gesture to the Palestinian people, an additional 530 terrorists chosen by Israel are to be released." It was noted that such a list has not yet been compiled and no criteria were set for the matter.

The government also asked the court to reject the petition by MK Yaakov Katz (National Union) asking the court to force the government to publish the Shamgar Commission report saying that "there is no cause for the court to get involved."

The country's in good hands. What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: The magic number

Sunday, 29 November 2009

Israel Matzav: Iran building ten new nuclear enrichment plants

Iran building ten new nuclear enrichment plants

Iran gave its response to President Obumbler's pleas for 'engagement' on Sunday and it was not what the President expected.

The atomic body has been ordered to begin building at five new sites earmarked for uranium enrichment plants, state television IRIB reported on its website.

The government also ordered the Iranian body to locate sites for another five over the next two months, the media organisation said.

The new enrichment plants are to be the same size as its main enrichment complex at Natanz.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is reported to have said he will not allow an inch of Iranian rights to be wasted.

The cabinet is meeting on Wednesday to discuss plans to enrich uranium up to 20% purity, the president is quoted as saying on the website.

Mr Ahmadinejad said Iran should be producing 250-300 tonnes of nuclear fuel per year, according to IRIB.

The development is likely to add further strain to relations between Iran and Western powers.

John Podhoretz comments:

It would seem logical to assume the purpose of these multiple sites is to make a successful military strike to downgrade or destroy Iran’s nuclear-bomb-making capacity difficult to the point of impossibility. It would be hard enough for Israel or the United States to stage a complex series of simultaneous surprise aerial bombings against four locations; from four to 14 would certainly be beyond Israel’s capacity and would significantly strain our own.

Remember when everybody was saying, including in the Democratic primary for president, that it would be unacceptable for Iran to get the bomb? Remember when President Bush said those who allowed Iran to get the bomb would enjoy the same reputation in the annals of history as the Western leaders at Munich?

Yeah, they're calling him Neville Obama.

Seriously though, this development may speed up the timetable for an Israeli strike. If there are really only four facilities right now, it will be much easier to hit four than fourteen.


Israel Matzav: Iran building ten new nuclear enrichment plants

Israel Matzav: 62 years since the Partition Plan

62 years since the Partition Plan

Big Government's open thread today reminds us that today is the 62nd anniversary of the UN Partition Plan that called for the division of 'Palestine' into a Jewish and Arab state. The Jews rejoiced - as you can see in the picture - while the Arabs just said no.

Foolish Arabs. They would have had much more land under the Partition Plan than they had under the 1949 armistice lines.

But then it was never a state that they wanted, was it?


Israel Matzav: 62 years since the Partition Plan

Israel Matzav: Help wanted!

Help wanted!

Defense Minister Ehud Barak is looking to triple the Defense Ministry's building inspectors.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak has put out an emergency call for building inspectors to be hired in order to enforce the government's building freeze in Judea and Samaria. Barak ordered Ministry officials to hire 40 inspectors to ensure that no building takes place in the affected areas. The new inspectors will be trained and on the job within two weeks.

Currently there are only 14 inspectors working in Judea and Samaria. Barak's office said that the inspectors would work in tandem with police, border police, and the civil administration, under the general responsibility of the IDF.

No one in this country is hired or trained for anything within two weeks.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Help wanted!

Israel Matzav: Switzerland and its friends

Switzerland and its friends

Living near mosques takes getting used to. Five times a day they issue a noisy call for prayer; the first time is approximately an hour and a half before sunrise. I have lived near mosques for years and for the most part they don't bother me (there is one within 500 meters of our home), but I can definitely understand that they bother others. It's a noise that is indescribable.

Reuters reports that Switzerland has voted on Sunday to ban the construction of new minarets, the towers use to project noisy calls for prayer in mosques.

If confirmed, the result would be a huge embarrassment for the neutral Swiss government, which had warned that amending the constitution to ban construction of minarets could serve could "serve the interests of extremist circles."

"The initiative would appear to be accepted, there is a positive trend. It's a huge surprise," French-language Swiss television said, 30 minutes after polls closed at midday.

A majority of voters as well as cantons appeared to have approved the initiative, it said, citing exit polls carried out by the Berne-based Institute Gfs.

Both the Swiss government and parliament had rejected the initiative as violating the Swiss constitution, freedom of religion and the nation's cherished tradition of tolerance. The United Nations human rights watchdog had also voiced concerns.

A group of politicians from the right-wing Swiss People's Party (SVP), the country's biggest party, and Federal Democratic Union gathered enough signatures to force the vote on the initiative which opposes the "Islamisation of Switzerland."

I suppose it would be a 'huge embarrassment,' particularly for Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey, pictured above flirting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But in fact, according to Reuters, Switzerland's minarets aren't allowed to issue the loud calls for prayer, and Sunday's vote was a backlash against the Islamization of Switzerland, which now has 300,000 Muslim immigrants among its population of 7,000,000. If today's vote is indicative of change coming in Switzerland, maybe it will mean a change in Switzerland's choice of friends. And such a change cannot come too soon according to Assaf Sagiv.

What a pity, then, that Switzerland’s pastoral image has come at the price of ignoring many of the basic values that any enlightened nation is duty-bound to uphold. In recent months, a series of controversial diplomatic moves have reflected a disturbing eagerness on the part of the Swiss government to appease some of the world’s greatest despots and terrorists, casting doubt (and not for the first time) on the public integrity and political insight of those who advocate a policy of neutrality. Indeed, these actions illustrate the vast moral chasm facing those who may be tempted to follow the Swiss example—a temptation with dangerous implications both for the future of the West and for freedom-loving peoples everywhere.

...

It might be tempting to chalk Swiss diplomacy up to a case of ovezealous neutrality. Yet it hardly cuts both ways: In July of this year, the official Swiss news agency reported that Ahmadinejad’s congenial hosts had decided to exhibit a more reserved attitude toward the Dalai Lama. Although the exiled Tibetan leader has been a lifelong proponent of non-violent resistance—in stark contrast, for example, to Mahmoud al-Zahar—the Swiss government decided to shun him during his visit to Lausanne in early August. Given that Switzerland is now in advanced negotiations with China over a free-trade agreement, it seems reasonable to conclude that the decision to sidestep the 74-year-old Nobel Peace Prize winner was the result of pressure from Beijing. In a radio interview, Foreign Minister Calmy-Rey reluctantly admitted as much. “It’s not a good time, it’s a difficult period, it’s impossible for me, for my colleagues too,” she said.

By contrast, the Swiss have been particularly obsequious toward Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi. In July 2008, Gaddafi’s son Hannibal and his wife Aline were arrested in Geneva after beating two domestic employees. After posting half a million Swiss francs in bail, the couple was released two days later. The Libyans were nonetheless outraged: Gaddafi the elder immediately slapped a series of sanctions on Switzerland—which he called a “mafia state” at the yearly G8 meeting—including the halting of all oil exports, the cancellation of all flights between the two countries, and the withdrawal of some $5 billion in Libyan assets from Swiss banks. For the Swiss, this was all too much to bear. During an August 2009 visit to Libya, the Swiss president publicly groveled before his hosts, apologizing for Hannibal’s “unjust arrest.”

The Swiss people are noted for several praiseworthy national traits, such as seriousness and precision. Unfortunately, as their leaders’ recent actions and the not-so-distant past demonstrate, they are sorely lacking in one crucial quality: shame.

Sagiv suggests that Switzerland's 'neutrality' has been out of place for the last 70 years.

In the twentieth century, however, the picture changed dramatically. World War II and the ensuing confrontation between the West and the Soviet bloc were not merely geopolitical conflicts between morally equivalent parties. Rather, they were clashes between worldviews, each of which sought to propel mankind in an opposing direction. These battles set open societies against closed ones, democracies against dictatorships, and value systems that promote pluralism and tolerance (albeit often begrudgingly honored) against ideologies that sought to obliterate the “other.” The battle being waged today between the West and radical Islam is no different. The atrocities carried out by extremist Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Somalia, Algeria, and Israel—and let us not forget New York—have made it clear that, now as then, the forces of freedom are up against unconstrained evil.

In such a conflict, there is no place for neutrality—or passivity, indifference, and weakness. The reality of our world demands total commitment to one or the other side. Sadly, Switzerland is not the only state that has chosen to be one of what Dante called “the sad souls… who lived without blame and without praise.” Even among those nations that have proclaimed their willingness to fight to protect their freedoms, many too frequently prefer to avoid decisive action, thus enabling their enemies to gather strength and prepare for the next round. Thus, for example, is Israel obliged to sit back and watch while Iran’s nuclear project, which poses an apocalyptic threat to its existence, moves forward, while in America and Europe—not to mention China and Russia—statesmen talk incessantly of “diplomatic channels” and warn against “burning bridges” with the Muslim world. And when the president of the United States asserts, in his initial response to the presidential election fraud in Iran and the subsequent suppression of popular protest, that “it’s not productive” for his country to intervene, his words recall the advice of Switzerland’s fifteenth-century patron saint, Nicholas of Fle, who counseled his flock: “Don’t get involved in other people’s affairs.”

History shows that at times there is simply no escaping involvement in other people’s affairs—lest we wish them to become our own. Winston Churchill once said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.” If we seek to avert disaster, we cannot suffice with not feeding the crocodile. We must also confront those who do.

Read the whole thing.

If Sunday's vote banning new minarets passes, it will be a small but significant step in setting Switzerland's neutrality on the right side of the moral divide. As Egyptian blogger Sandmonkey points out on Twitter,

Switzerland is banning the ... extension of a mosque. Not building the mosque itself. Muslim countries do that, to churches.

Still, a Swiss ban on minarets would be a small but important step in the right direction.

Israel Matzav: Switzerland and its friends

Israel Matzav: Obama's 'gate crashers' may have been invited after all

Obama's 'gate crashers' may have been invited after all

In a story that has gotten a lot of attention in the US, but comparatively little in Israel, a couple 'crashed' President Obama's state dinner for the Indian Prime Minister last Tuesday night. The couple turned out to be Michaele and Tareq Salahi. AP described Michaele Salahi as "a reality TV hopeful trying to get on Bravo's 'The Real Housewives of D.C.'" The Secret Service is quite upset about the security breach - the Salahis got into the receiving line and shook hands with President Obumbler and Vice President Biden - and there has even been talk about them receiving prison time for their offense. One reason why they may have succeeded in 'crashing' the party without anyone noticing is that you would have had to check the guest list to realize that they were not invited. You see, the Salahis have met and been photographed with President Obama before. Jim Hoft fills in the details (Hat Tip: Ashan).

From the Polo Contacts Website–
“America’s Cup Polo Pre-Event with President-Elect Barack Obama”

From Left to Right is: Randy Jackson, better known as a Judge on American Idol – his previous life he was a bass player for the Rock band JOURNEY, which also performed at the America’s Polo Cup. Others pictured are Black Eyed Peas Rock Band, Tareq Salahi the President of the America’s Polo Cup, President Elect Obama, Fergie from Black Eyed Peas and Michaele Salahi a former Miss USA and SuperModel.
But here's where it gets interesting.
American Power discovered this on the White House party crashers- They belong to a radical anti-Israeli group [unfortunately, ATFP is not considered that radical anymore. Obama's National Security Adviser James Jones spoke to them last month. CiJ]:
Tareq Salahi, the polo-playing intruder, is a Palestinian nationalist with ties to the American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP) , a pro-Palestine lobby demanding the “right of return” for all Palestinian refugees and their descendants. The “right of return” has long been considered the backdoor to Israel’s destruction. But not only that: ATFP President Ziad Asali is an America-basher who blamed 9/11 on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Asali was a lead U.S. official to PLO terrorist Yassir Arafat’s funeral in 2004. And in a position paper in 2007, the ATFP called for a power-sharing agreement at the Palestinian Authority, which would have included the State Department’s designated-terrorist group, Hamas.
And, there’s more…
There sure is.

The former Vice President of ATFP is... Rashid Khalidi. Yes, the same Rashid Khalidi whose videotape the Los Angeles Times refused to release before the election (or since) because it showed Khalidi and Obama bashing Israel at Khalidi's farewell to Chicago party. The same former PLO member (when the PLO was classified as a terror organization by the United States government) whom Barack Hussein Obama described as his friend at the University of Chicago. The same Rashid Khalidi around whose table Obama held 'conversations' that forced him to re-examine his prejudices.

Read the whole thing.

Ashan speculates that this might have been the reason that the state dinner was held in a tent. That way, the Salahis could have a conversation with Obama in the reception line and it would be less likely to be recorded. It's an interesting thought.

Israel Matzav: Obama's 'gate crashers' may have been invited after all

Israel Matzav: JNF to plant trees in new 'Palestinian' city

JNF to plant trees in new 'Palestinian' city

The Jewish National Fund (JNF) is planting trees in a new 'Palestinian' city called Ruwabi, which is being built north of Ramallah. On the other hand, the JNF refuses to carry on any activities in Jewish cities and towns that are outside the 1949 armistice lines (Hat Tip: David Hazony via Twitter).

As a first step, the JNF contributed 3,000 tree seedlings for planting in what is meant to be a forested area on the edges of the new city. At the same time, the forestry experts of the JNF have been advising the city planners on the matter.

Suhil Zaydan, one of the JNF's forestry managers, is serving as liaison between the organization and the city planers.

"There have been a number of meetings, both at the location where the city will be built and also at the JNF greenhouses," he says. "We have contributed with our know-how, by advising on how to prepare the ground for the planting and how public gardens should be planned, as well as the best times for planting, and what kinds of trees it is preferable to plant. We did not talk about politics and we shall not talk about it - we deal with trees and understand forestry, botany and greenhouses."

The ambitious project of building a city from scratch has drawn an estimated investment of $800 million, mostly from Palestinian and Qatari sources.

The plan is for 6,000 housing units over a 6,300 dunam area that is supposed to provide housing for nearly 40,000 people and employ some 10,000 Palestinian workers. The project is aimed at the Palestinian middle class.

And that policy?

According to its official policy, the JNF does not purchase lands beyond the Green Line, one reason being to keep it out of political debates liable to have a negative effect on donations.

The Jewish National Fund (Hebrew: קרן קימת לישראל, Keren Kayemet LeYisrael) (abbreviated as JNF, and sometimes KKL) was founded in 1901 to buy and develop land in Ottoman Palestine (later Israel) for Jewish settlement. But while buying land for Jews across the 'green line' is liable to have a 'negative effect on donations,' buying and developing land for Arabs (with Jewish money) is perfectly acceptable.

What could go wrong?

By the way, read the whole thing. I guarantee you that there are no other trees in the world that are receiving the care these trees for the 'Palestinians' are receiving.


Israel Matzav: JNF to plant trees in new 'Palestinian' city

Israel Matzav: High Court appeal: Disclose commission recommendations on hostage release

High Court appeal: Disclose commission recommendations on hostage release

National Union MK Yaakov Katz (Ketzaleh) has filed an appeal with the High Court of Justice asking that Prime Minister Netanyahu be ordered to disclose the contents of the Shamgar Commission report. The Shamgar Commission, which was established to recommend principles for 'prisoner exchanges,' looked at the effects of trading terrorists for Israeli hostages, and is believed to have recommended strongly against such trades. Although the report was delivered to the government in 2008, it has never been released to the public.

In the appeal, Katz claimed Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are preventing the publication of the Shamgar Commission's findings until after the deal to release captive IDF soldier Gilad Schalit is completed.

...

"Imagine what the outcome of the Second Lebanon War would have been if the Winograd Commission had delivered its findings in advance of the war. How prepared we would have been," he said last week. "Now, we have that opportunity with the Shamgar Commission. Netanyahu must reveal the findings before we make any decision to release terrorists, and he must have a debate in the government and in the Knesset before he reaches any conclusion."

Commission chairman Meir Shamgar is a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Yes, of course the report should be released.

Israel Matzav: High Court appeal: Disclose commission recommendations on hostage release

Israel Matzav: The Narrative

The Narrative

There are two surprising things about this article. One is that it appears in the New York Times. The other is that it was written by Tom Friedman (Hat Tip: David Hazony via Twitter).

Have no doubt: we punched a fist into the Arab/Muslim world after 9/11, partly to send a message of deterrence, but primarily to destroy two tyrannical regimes — the Taliban and the Baathists — and to work with Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics. In the process, we did some stupid and bad things. But for every Abu Ghraib, our soldiers and diplomats perpetrated a million acts of kindness aimed at giving Arabs and Muslims a better chance to succeed with modernity and to elect their own leaders.

The Narrative was concocted by jihadists to obscure that.

It’s working. As a Jordanian-born counterterrorism expert, who asked to remain anonymous, said to me: “This narrative is now omnipresent in Arab and Muslim communities in the region and in migrant communities around the world. These communities are bombarded with this narrative in huge doses and on a daily basis. [It says] the West, and right now mostly the U.S. and Israel, is single-handedly and completely responsible for all the grievances of the Arab and the Muslim worlds. Ironically, the vast majority of the media outlets targeting these communities are Arab-government owned — mostly from the Gulf.”

This narrative suits Arab governments. It allows them to deflect onto America all of their people’s grievances over why their countries are falling behind. And it suits Al Qaeda, which doesn’t need much organization anymore — just push out The Narrative over the Web and satellite TV, let it heat up humiliated, frustrated or socially alienated Muslim males, and one or two will open fire on their own. See: Major Hasan.

“Liberal Arabs like me are as angry as a terrorist and as determined to change the status quo,” said my Jordanian friend. The only difference “is that while we choose education, knowledge and success to bring about change, a terrorist, having bought into the narrative, has a sense of powerlessness and helplessness, which are inculcated in us from childhood, that lead him to believe that there is only one way, and that is violence.”

Friedman asks what to do. He says that he believes that most Arab Muslims know the truth about the Narrative and he urges President Obama to confront them about it. Unfortunately, everything we have seen about President Obama to date indicates that he is someone who appeases Islam, and not someone who confronts it and exposes its flaws.

But perhaps the most telling thing about this article is the fact that Friedman's Jordanian friend asked to remain anonymous. Jordan is a country that is supposedly friendly with the United States and has a peace treaty with Israel. Jordan is a country that is viewed as friendly with the United States, and it has a peace treaty with Israel. Yet a 2008 Pew study shows Jordanian approval of Jews in single digits, while the majority expresses positive views of Hamas and Hezbullah.

Perhaps Friedman should confront his friend with Jordan's attitude toward Jews and ask what can be done about it before asking that President Obama confront Muslims generally. A country's attitude toward Jews and Israel says more about the love for freedom and mankind in that country than anything else.


Israel Matzav: The Narrative

Israel Matzav: Is it too late to stop the 'freeze'?

Is it too late to stop the 'freeze'?

Some people still think the 'freeze' can be stopped. Yisrael Beiteinu's Uzi Landau has submitted a demand for a debate by the entire government.

"This is a central issue in the state agenda, and it is essential that all members of government get a chance to express their opinions," Landau said.

And Likud's Danny Danon has submitted enough signatures to bring the 'freeze' to a debate within his party.

MK Danny Danon handed in a sufficient number of Likud members' signatures in order to demand a debate on the recently imposed construction freeze in West Bank settlements.

Danon said the signatures "express public opinion in the Likud, as well as the opinions of ministers unable to be here".

But watch this interview with Efrat Council head Oded Ravivi - who is a friend of a friend. It will make you wonder whether the 'freeze' has any meaning at all in light of Israeli government policies over the last several years.

Let's go to the videotape.



By the way, this shows just how badly the Obama administration messed up with its freeze demand. Efrat, which is in a 'settlement bloc' that most Israelis expect to remain within Israel even in the eventuality of 'peace' with the 'Palestinians,' hasn't had a new building permit in eight years. That kind of makes you wonder why Obama made such a big deal out of a 'settlement freeze,' doesn't it? And now that one has been imposed, you can bet that when those ten months are up, there is going to be enormous pressure on Netanyahu from Israelis to turn on the faucets and let the construction begin in earnest.

A silver lining exists in the current clouds after all.

Israel Matzav: Is it too late to stop the 'freeze'?

Israel Matzav: NGO: 'Settlements' are legal and we'll go to court to prove it

NGO: 'Settlements' are legal and we'll go to court to prove it

An Israeli NGO has sent a letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton threatening a class action lawsuit if she continues to call Jewish cities and towns in Judea and Samaria 'illegal settlements.' The letter, which was also sent to Prime Minister Netanyahu, argues that the 'settlement freeze' is illegal under a 1924 treaty in which the United States recognized that Judea and Samaria were part of the British Mandate for 'Palestine.'

The Office for Israeli Constitutional Law, a non-governmental legal action organization, sent a letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week, warning that by labeling Jewish settlements in the West Bank illegal, she is violating international law.

The little-known Anglo-American Convention, a treaty signed by the US and British governments in 1924, stipulated that the US fully accepted upon itself the Mandate for Palestine, which declared all of the West Bank within its borders.

"The treaty has been hidden," said OFICL director Mark Kaplan. "But if you look at the House [of Representatives] deliberations during World War I, people are saying, 'Look, we've invested a lot of money in Palestine, and we expect that this treaty will be upheld.'"

Though the United Nations' 1947 partition plan declared the West Bank an Arab territory, the mandate's borders still hold today.

"The mandate expired in 1948 when Israel got its independence," Kaplan said. "But the American-Anglo convention was a treaty that was connected to the mandate. Treaties themselves have no statute of limitations, so their rights go on ad infinitum."

"The UN partition plan was just that-a plan," said OFICL chairman Michael Snidecor in a statement. "The General Assembly has no authority to create countries or change borders."



Israel Matzav: NGO: 'Settlements' are legal and we'll go to court to prove it

Israel Matzav: How the US failed to get Bin Laden

How the US failed to get Bin Laden

In December 2001, the United States had Osama Bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora in Afghanistan and allowed him to escape.

By early December 2001, Bin Laden’s world had shrunk to a complex of caves and tunnels carved into a mountainous section of eastern Afghanistan known as Tora Bora. Cornered in some of the most forbidding terrain on earth, he and several hundred of his men, the largest concentration of Al Qaeda fighters of the war, endured relentless pounding by American aircraft, as many as 100 air strikes a day. One 15,000-pound bomb, so huge it had to be rolled out the back of a C-130 cargo plane, shook the mountains for miles. It seemed only a matter of time before U.S. troops and their Afghan allies overran the remnants of Al Qaeda hunkered down in the thin, cold air at 14,000 feet.

Bin Laden expected to die. His last will and testament, written on December 14, reflected his fatalism. ‘‘Allah commended to us that when death approaches any of us that we make a bequest to parents and next of kin and to Muslims as a whole,’’ he wrote, according to a copy of the will that surfaced later and is regarded as authentic. ‘‘Allah bears witness that the love of jihad and death in the cause of Allah has dominated my life and the verses of the sword permeated every cell in my heart, ‘and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together.’ How many times did I wake up to find myself reciting this holy verse!’’ He instructed his wives not to remarry and apologized to his children for devoting himself to jihad.

But the Al Qaeda leader would live to fight another day. Fewer than 100 American commandos were on the scene with their Afghan allies and calls for reinforcements to launch an assault were rejected. Requests were also turned down for U.S. troops to block the mountain paths leading to sanctuary a few miles away in Pakistan. The vast array of American military power, from sniper teams to the most mobile divisions of the Marine Corps and the Army, was kept on the sidelines. Instead, the U.S. command chose to rely on airstrikes and untrained Afghan militias to attack bin Laden and on Pakistan’s loosely organized Frontier Corps to seal his escape routes. On or around December 16, two days after writing his will, bin Laden and an entourage of bodyguards walked unmolested out of Tora Bora and disappeared into Pakistan’s unregulated tribal area. Most analysts say he is still there today.

The decision not to deploy American forces to go after bin Laden or block his escape was made by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his top commander, Gen. Tommy Franks, the architects of the unconventional Afghan battle plan known as Operation Enduring Freedom. Rumsfeld said at the time that he was concerned that too many U.S. troops in Afghanistan would create an anti-American backlash and fuel a widespread insurgency. Reversing the recent American military orthodoxy known as the Powell doctrine, the Afghan model emphasized minimizing the U.S. presence by relying on small, highly mobile teams of special operations troops and CIA paramilitary operatives working with the Afghan opposition. Even when his own commanders and senior intelligence officials in Afghanistan and Washington argued for dispatching more U.S. troops, Franks refused to deviate from the plan.

There were enough U.S. troops in or near Afghanistan to execute the classic sweep-and-block maneuver required to attack bin Laden and try to prevent his escape. It would have been a dangerous fight across treacherous terrain, and the injection of more U.S. troops and the resulting casualties would have contradicted the risk-averse, ‘‘light footprint’’ model formulated by Rumsfeld and Franks.

But commanders on the scene and elsewhere in Afghanistan argued that the risks were worth the reward.

Five years later, Israel failed to learn the lesson of Tora Bora.

Have we learned it since?

Israel Matzav: How the US failed to get Bin Laden

Israel Matzav: Iran to halt voluntary cooperation with the IAEA

Iran to halt voluntary cooperation with the IAEA

This should not come as too great a surprise to anyone. Now that his good friend Mohammed ElBaradei is not going to chair the IAEA anymore, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran has announced that it is halting all voluntary cooperation with the nuclear watchdog (Hat Tip: Jihad Watch).

Iran officially announced that it will cease its voluntary cooperation with the IAEA after the agency’s Board of Governors adopted a resolution against Iran on Friday under pressure by Western countries.

Iran said the drafters of the anti-Iran resolution made a historic mistake and advised the West to discard its policy of confrontation with Tehran.

“To show its goodwill, the Islamic Republic of Iran has so far taken steps beyond its commitments, but this resolution will cause Iran to cooperate with the agency only within the framework of the NPT (nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty),” Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran’s ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, said on Friday.

“The Board of Governors’ resolution will disrupt the current atmosphere of cooperation and will cause Iran to discontinue its voluntary cooperation which went beyond its commitments,” Soltanieh told the Mehr News Agency.

One other little curiosity from Friday's IAEA vote: The third largest recipient of US foreign aid abstained.

Malaysia, which is the current president of the IAEA Board, Venezuela, and Cuba voted against the resolution, and Afghanistan, Brazil, Egypt, Pakistan, South Africa and Turkey abstained. Azerbaijan Republic missed the vote.

Someone please remind me again why the US gives Egypt, which has one of the bigger interests in not seeing Iran go nuclear, $2 billion in foreign aid every year.

But wait, it gets worse:

The Egyptian ambassador to the IAEA said there is no justification for the resolution since it will damage the quality of Iran’s cooperation with the UN body.

Which 'cooperation' did he have in mind?


Israel Matzav: Iran to halt voluntary cooperation with the IAEA

Israel Matzav: Major Nidal Malik Hassan's enabler

Major Nidal Malik Hassan's enabler

Mark Steyn nails the political correctness that led to the Fort Hood massacre earlier this month (Hat Tip: Instapundit):

Major Hasan couldn’t have been more straightforward about who and what he was. An army psychiatrist, he put “SoA”—i.e., “Soldier of Allah”—on his business card. At the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, he was reprimanded for trying to persuade patients to convert to Islam and fellow pupils objected to his constant “anti-American propaganda,” but, as the Associated Press reported, “a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal written complaint.”

This is your brain on political correctness.

As the writer Barry Rubin pointed out, Major Hasan was the first mass murderer in U.S. history to give a PowerPoint presentation outlining the rationale for the crime he was about to commit. And he gave the presentation to a roomful of fellow army psychiatrists and doctors. Some of whom glanced queasily at their colleagues, but none of whom actually spoke up. And, when the question of whether then-Captain Hasan was, in fact, “psychotic,” the policy committee at Walter Reed Army Medical Center worried “how would it look if we kick out one of the few Muslim residents.”

This is your brain on political correctness.

So instead he got promoted to major and shipped to Fort Hood. And barely had he got to Texas when he started making idle chit-chat praising the jihadist murderer of two soldiers outside a recruitment centre in Little Rock. “This is what Muslims should do, stand up to the aggressors,” Major Hasan told his superior officer, Colonel Terry Lee. “People should strap bombs on themselves and go into Times Square.”

In less enlightened times, Colonel Lee would have concluded that, being in favour of the murder of his comrades, Major Hasan was objectively on the side of the enemy. But instead he merely cautioned the major against saying things that might give people the wrong impression. Which is to say, the right impression.

This is your brain on political correctness.

“You need to lock it up, major,” advised the colonel.

Steyn's warnings on political correctness are pertinent for Israel as well. Too many of our politicians ignore what the Arab Muslims would like to do to the Jews in this country since it's not politically correct to talk about it. We pretend that the 'Palestinians' want peace when they don't and we appease their enablers in Washington, New York, London and Paris by stifling normal life in our own communities. We pretend that creating a 'Palestinian state' on the '1967 borders' will resolve our dispute with the Arab world when nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes, it's all part of the same political correctness. And if we and other countries in the free world don't stop abiding by it, we're going to end up with more Nidal Malik Hassan's in more countries around the world.


Israel Matzav: Major Nidal Malik Hassan's enabler

Israel Matzav: Awww..... Guess who the big losers are in Dubai

Awww..... Guess who the big losers are in Dubai

Guess who the big losers are in Dubai? Yes, you guessed it. The 'Palestinians.'

Arab financial analysts said the crisis in the Gulf states, compounded by debts and falling oil prices, will affect the economy in the Palestinian Territories, where many families depend on money from relatives working in Dubai, primarily in construction.

Other Palestinians work as engineers, instructors and in technology-related professions in Dubai. Some have started construction businesses there, such as Arab-Tech, which was among the country's first victims of the financial crisis.

This recession resulted in the cancelation of building contracts and projects and sent the industry into a freeze, prompting many Palestinians to leave Dubai for neighboring Qatar - which last month injected $6 billion in fresh capital into its banking system to "restore confidence" in its own economy - and in Saudi Arabia. Some have returned to the West Bank.

Maybe if the 'Palestinians' don't have it so good, they'll consider compromising on some of their demands.

Nah, perish the thought.

Israel Matzav: Awww..... Guess who the big losers are in Dubai
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...