Read More About:

Share This Post

From Dan, Viet Nam Veteran, now suffering the awful consequences from the aftermath of Agent Orange. May his great sacrifice not have been made in vain.

www.israel-commentary.org

Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014


He was getting old and paunchy
And his hair was falling fast,
And he sat around the Legion,
Telling stories of the past.

Of a war that he once fought in
And the deeds that he had done,
In his exploits with his buddies;
They were heroes, every one.

And ‘tho sometimes to his neighbors
His tales became a joke,
All his buddies listened quietly
For they knew where of he spoke.

But we’ll hear his tales no longer,
For ol’ Joe has passed away,
And the world’s a little poorer
For a Veteran died today.

He won’t be mourned by many,
Just his children and his wife.
For he lived an ordinary,
Very quiet sort of life.

He held a job and raised a family,
Going quietly on his way;
And the world won’t note his passing,
‘Tho a Veteran died today.

When politicians leave this earth,
Their bodies lie in state,
While thousands note their passing,
And proclaim that they were great.

Papers tell of their life stories
From the time that they were young,
But the passing of a Veteran
Goes unnoticed, and unsung.

Is the greatest contribution
To the welfare of our land,
Some jerk who breaks his promise
And cons his fellow man?

Or the ordinary fellow
Who in times of war and strife,
Goes off to serve his country
And offers up his life?

The politician’s stipend
And the style in which he lives,
Are often disproportionate,
To the service that he gives.

While the ordinary Veteran,
Who offered up his all,
Is paid off with a medal
And perhaps a pension, small.

It is not the politicians
With their compromise and ploys,
Who won for us the freedom
That our country now enjoys.

Should you find yourself in danger,
With your enemies at hand,
Would you really want some cop-out,
With his ever-waffling stand?

Or would you want a Veteran
His home, his country, his kin,
Just a common Veteran,
Who would fight until the end.

He was just a common Veteran,
And his ranks are growing thin,
But his presence should remind us
We may need his likes again.

For when countries are in conflict,
We find the Veteran’s part,
Is to clean up all the troubles
That the politicians start.

If we cannot do him honour
While he’s here to hear the praise,
Then at least let’s give him homage
At the ending of his days.

Perhaps just a simple headline
In the paper that might say:

“OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING,
A VETERAN DIED TODAY.”
PLEASE pass On The Patriotism!
YOU can make a difference.

If you are proud of our Vets, then send this to them.
You’ll be glad you did.
Then send it to ALL your friends …


Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

Address by Dr. Daniel Pipes, November 12, 2014

Review and Commentary by Jerome S. Kaufman

We were fortunate to have Dr. Daniel Pipes political analyst, writer, founder and editor of the Middle East Forum address our synagogue Wednesday evening. He spoke on world-wide events. Faced with this formidable task, Dr. Pipes elected to try and give us a snap shot view of those countries in which we were likely to have the most interest.

Dr. Pipes was concerned with Turkey, putting aside, just for the moment, the terrifying threat of Iran’s nuclear weapon. Unfortunately, Iran’s development of the bomb appears to be a foregone conclusion, especially with the ineptitude of John Kerry and the questionable political allegiance and motivation of Barack Obama.

Dr. Pipe’s concern was based upon the genuine strength of Turkey — its size, population — apx. 75 million — relatively advanced culture, education, military capability, vital geographical location and most important, its leader, Recep Erdogan, a dedicated enemy of the West. Not unlike Vladimir Putin, who is obviously working toward the reformation of the USSR, Erdogan is equally ambitious in his recidivism dedicated to the return of a Grand Caliphate over the Middle East and much of Europe.

Pipes then spoke of Iraq and Syria, almost in the past tense, as completely failed states whose flimsy fabric, artificially created after WWI, was easily destroyed by the initial thrust of the very successful Sunni Moslem extremist group, ISIS/ISIL, now attracting dissident Muslims of all stripes and nuance.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, has issued a defiant call for followers to “erupt volcanoes of jihad everywhere”. He specifically called on Isis fighters to launch attacks in Saudi Arabia, particularly on its rulers, and in Yemen. He proclaims himself as the initiator and founder of the reborn Grand Caliphate. By the way, within the last few days, written and video reports have been presented claiming Baghdadi has been killed.

Unfortunately, assassinations of this sort never seem to mean very much with a new leader quickly taking the place of the guy eliminated. Obama’s much self-heralded and only supposed foreign achievement, the assassination of Osama bin Laden, is a perfect example of this much ado about something that quickly becomes very little.

Dr. Pipes was dismissive of ISIS, what with their crude beheadings, their return to the ugliest aspects of sharia law and, in the process, creating enemies of the major Arab powers: Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Yemen and Iran, when their own destructive ambitions do not conflict. Al-Baghdadi even woke up the naive, slumbering, totally ineffective, underarmed, pacifist and cowardly European Union unified only in their mindless denunciation of their real ally in the area, the state of Israel.

Dr. Pipes then addressed the Israeli/Arab conflict. There was no equivocation in his remarks. The “Peace Process” is a complete failure — no matter how many trips back and forth made by John Kerry. The process itself is based upon an ancient lie perpetrated by Yasir Arafat signing the Oslo Accords in 1993 wherein the Arabs were to accept the existence of Israel as a separate Jewish State. Two different peoples were to live side by side in peace.

Pipes recommends Israel finally disregard the useless, fictitious Oslo Accords, defeat its sworn relentless enemy and not stop until complete victory with abject surrender is achieved. Nothing else has worked for 50 years and nothing else will.

Pipes then briefly discussed the Egyptian nation and declared it also a failed state. Egypt has long been in desperate straits. Once considered the bread basket of the Middle East as a result of the agricultural munificence of the Nile River, it is now unable to feed its own gargantuan, ever growing population. There is no promise in sight except as an insatiable welfare state totally dependent upon the kind support of its Arab neighbors and Israel.

Finally, Dr. Pipes got to current American Foreign Policy. He considered it an unmitigated disaster. Obama has alienated allies that have been with us for decades. The first thing he did taking office was to insult the British with the return of the sculpture of Winston Churchill held in a place of well deserved honor in the White House.

He left the Czechs and Poles hanging by stopping the development of sophisticated United Nations air defense systems on their territory to ward off the Russians who quickly have taken full advantage of this destructive action. He has allowed Russia to grab huge swaths of territory under false pretenses in Georgia and now Ukraine. As a result the Baltic States and Poland live in understandable dread and have no faith in the US defending them. Nor does anyone else.

Obama has also alienated our long time Arab allies: Saudi Arabic, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and seems to have a personal vendetta against Israel. And, is now, obsequiously attempting to placate Iran, not unlike the way we have placated North Korea with disastrous consequences.

Obama continued to destroy us by deliberately killing our space program leaving us completely dependent upon the Russians, of all people, for our existence in space. In addition, he has drastically cut the size of our army and recently stopped the building of new submarines badly needed against Russian and Chinese incursions into the farthest reaches of the South China Sea and vital American interests in the Pacific.

And, that is just the tip of the iceberg of the list. Never mind going into the domestic disasters and destruction he has wrought with his personal toys — the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and his buddy, Eric Holder’s Justice Dept.

The meeting was then opened for questions. The first question was why was it that the media and the Congress and the Supreme Court have refused to Call out Obama for what he obviously is – A destroyer of the once great United States of America!

Dr. Pipes gave a politically correct answer. He described Obama as basically a Left winger who indeed resented the power and grandeur and strength of the US and, like his father and mother, considers the US an exploiting colonial power taking advantage of the “poor folks” of the world.

Pipes went on excusing Obama’s behavior as that of a confused man. In his heart of hearts Obama despises this country but, at the same time, he knows he has the role of the President of the US and is supposed to defend us and leave an exemplary legacy. Dr. Pipes explained Obama by saying it seems he assumes the role of colonial destroyer of the US on Mon and Wed but assumes the supposed usual defender of the US role on Tuesday and Thursday.

And, that is where Dr. Pipes and I parted company. Obama’s Tuesday/Thursday role is a farce wherein he cleverly pretends to help this great country but in fact continues to destroy it in every way he and his carefully assembled staff of misfits, malcontents and revolutionaries can devise.

Unfortunately, a huge percentage of Americans have no idea what is happening, are sound asleep and understandably pre-occupied worrying about the source of their next pay check!

Without any doubt, we will soon pay the dire consequences of all of the above and May the good Lord please take the time to defend us. No one else will.

By Jerome S. Kaufman

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice
Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

From Gaza to Catalonia: Europe’s insufferable hypocrisy

By Michael Freund
Jerusalem Post
November 11, 2014

This past Saturday, European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini set a world record for diplomatic duplicity and haste. Barely seven days after assuming her new post, the former Italian foreign minister rushed to pay a visit to Gaza and Ramallah, where she managed to call for the division of Jerusalem, denounce housing construction for Jews in Judea and Samaria, and insist on the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Mustering up all the moral bluster that European diplomats are so fond of, she did not hesitate to lecture Israel, as if she knew better than the Jewish state what its own national interests might be. Dead Syrians may be littering the streets of Aleppo while Islamic State is busy beheading Kurds and Christians in Iraq, and Saudi women might be struggling to be allowed to drive cars, but Mogherini appears to have a one-track mind when it comes to the Middle East. And it revolves only around Israel.

This is European hypocrisy of the highest order. It is sickening in its scope and magnitude. And it is time for it to stop.

As the continent where more Jewish blood was spilled over the past 2,000 years than any other, Europe has a special responsibility and a moral obligation to support Israel.  

(Surely you are kidding! Whats “responsibility”  have to do with the price of bananas or olive oil?) jsk

Yes, that’s right. You read that correctly: Europe owes Israel.

They have an eternal debt to pay to the Jewish people for the slaughters, massacres, blood libels, anti-Semitism, forced conversions, expulsions, Crusades and Inquisitions which they inflicted upon our ancestors for two millennia.

All of this might sound like ancient history to Mogherini and her colleagues, who probably don’t see what it has to do with compelling Israel to create a Palestinian state. So just in case, let’s highlight a more recent example of European hypocrisy, one that is closer to home and can be found in Europe’s own back yard: Catalonia.

This past Sunday, millions of men and women across the northeastern Spanish region made a historic cry for liberty. Bravely defying heavy-handed threats and intimidation from Madrid, some two million Catalans took part in a referendum on independence, peacefully exercising their basic human right to decide on their own future.

And the results were decisive. Over 80 percent of voters backed Catalonia’s independence from Spain, prompting Catalan leader Artur Mas to declare that the ballot “made it very clear that we want to govern ourselves.”

“We deserve to vote in a legal and binding referendum,” Mas said, adding, “and this is what we are going to do.”

Curiously, however, the Catalonians’ roar for independence doesn’t seem to interest the rest of Europe as much as that of the Palestinians, even though the former have a much better case for having their own state.

To begin with, there actually once was a Catalonian State, albeit briefly, in the 17th century, whereas there has never been an independent Palestine in all of history. Even if one does think the Palestinians have been living under occupation since 1967, Spain has occupied Catalonia for 300 years, making it a longer-running dispute, and justice delayed is justice denied.

And whereas Catalans can legitimately claim to be a nation with their own distinct language and culture, the Palestinian Arabs cannot.

Nonetheless, this doesn’t appear to bother Europe one whit, as it completely ignores the Catalan case for statehood while championing that of the Palestinians.

Adding to the irony is that the Spanish parliament in Madrid – the same one that will not countenance freedom for Catalonia – is set to vote on recognizing “Palestine” as an independent country.

This only goes to prove that when it comes to Israel, Spain’s policy amounts to “do as we say, not as we do.”

I’d like to think that the new European push to recognize a Palestinian state stems from naiveté, from some misguided belief that doing so will somehow dull the threat posed by Islamic extremism. Or that perhaps they are simply wallowing in ignorance and truly believe the Palestinians to be the aggrieved party in the conflict with Israel.

But I know better — and I hope you do as well. The hypocrisy is so egregious and so blatant that it cannot and must not be ignored.

Sadly, what we are witnessing now is little more than a continuation of Europe’s mistreatment of the Jews, but with a new twist. After all, for 2,000 years, Europeans told the Jews to leave and “go to Israel.” Now that we are finally here they want us to abandon it and hand it over to our foes.

And yet when it comes to a long-running dispute in the heart of Europe, they don’t even think of suggesting a division of Barcelona or the creation of a Catalonian State living side-by-side with Spain in peace and security.

So perhaps it is time for someone to pull Mogherini aside and politely whisper into her ear: before you start offering unsolicited advice to Israel, you might want to get your own hypocritical house in order.

(Oh! And, let us not forget the good old USA with Obama/Chas. Hagel  currently negotiating a  seal of approval to  Iran to complete nuclear weapons aimed directly at the State of the Jews – Israel) jsk

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

From: Straight Shooter, No holds barred — Bernie Goldberg

November 4, 2014 in Featured, Political Opinion

Some off-the-beaten track takeaways from the 2014-midterm elections …

We all know that politics isn’t for the faint of heart, that things can get nasty, especially when you’re losing:  especially when you’re desperate.

So Democrats went to their playbook and did what they too often do. They consciously tried to divide Americans – along gender lines (rehashing the so-called GOP war on women) … along racial lines (with despicable ads whose unmistakable message was that a vote for the Republican candidate was a vote for killing black kids) … and along class lines (trying to convince voters that big bad evil businesses didn’t create jobs). (It is called demagoguery — divisive, destructive, sick and the last desperate refuge of hate-mongers) jsk

The bad news is this kind of cold-blooded cynicism has worked for Democrats in the past. The good news is it did not work this time around.

Yes, the Democrats had a lot to overcome. The landscape was ruby red this year. Many of the key races were in Red States, making it tough for Democrats who were trying to hang on to their jobs. A vast majority of Americans thought the country was on the wrong track. President Obama was immensely unpopular in those Red States (and elsewhere) for way too many reasons to go into in this space. Americans were voting against him — maybe more than they were voting for Republicans.

And Republicans had good candidates this time around. No one said, “ I am not a witch” or blabbed about “legitimate rape.” This time around the dumb comments came from Democrats.

But,  just as important is that this year the Democrats’ divide and conquer strategy failed them. Americans said “Enough!” A friend sent me an email on Election Day about how voters have finally pulled back the curtain on liberal politicians and discovered they’ve been running a con game for way too long. “Superficial arguments like the war on women and racism are becoming laughable,” he said, “particularly among young people, which leaves Democrats with very little. If division and identity politics actually start to backfire, it finally exposes liberals for what they truly are.”

But, it would be a mistake for Republicans to get too giddy over the midterm results … to look at how many Democrats bit the dust and make premature optimistic projections about 2016. Rush Limbaugh has said that when voters have finally had enough of Democratic policies that don’t work, they vote Republican. But after a while, they go back to the Democrats – because Republicans don’t successfully articulate what they stand for.

I think he’s right. But I think (as I said in a recent column) the GOP also needs a facelift. Good policies won’t be enough to win in two years. The Party needs a new image because the old one isn’t attracting new voters. As I’ve said before, too many Republican leaders who appear on camera look like funeral directors. They look like yesterday. Voters only care about tomorrow.

So, Republicans need a charismatic front man or woman. Someone who is young and articulate and attractive. An African American or Latino would be nice. A conservative George Lopez – who is funny and likable — would be just fine with me.

Finally, here’s my suggestion for what Republicans should do now that they have control of both Houses of Congress. Vote on every bill that Harry Reid wouldn’t let come to the floor for a vote: the Keystone pipeline, tax reform, and immigration policy that starts with border security. If Democrats vote “No,” fine. Let them become the Party of No.  And if Republicans get barely enough support from the other side, but not enough to satisfy the most liberal president in our history, let him veto whatever they send him. Let him use his veto pen until it runs out of ink. And let him become the obstructionist, the one who is standing in the way of getting things done in Washington.

The question is: Will any of that hurt Hillary? Or will voters revert to their comfort zone and once again pick a Democrat for president? I don’t know what I’m having for lunch so I have no clue on what’s going to happen in two years. But here’s something to think about: Every legitimate criticism of the woman who would be the first female US president will be portrayed (by fellow Democrats and her allies in the so-called mainstream media) as an attack on women. But remember, it didn’t work this time around. And it may not work next time around, either. Millions of Americans are saying,”Enough!”

PS  (Obama post-election, already denying that he lost and will continue to work against the best interests of the US ignoring the voters and the US Constitution.  This total narcissist makes me sick!) jsk

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

II 19 second video of Obama below describing the US role in the World. You will not believe this statement!

June 21, 2012

By David Herold

I am reposting this article for those who have missed it.

I knew they had both lost their law license, but I didn’t know why until I read this.

This is 100% legit. I check it out at https://www.iardc.org/ Stands for Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Committee. It’s the official arm of lawyer discipline in Illinois ; and they are very strict. (Talk about irony.) Even I, at the advanced age of almost 65, maintain (at the cost of approximately $600/year) my law license that I worked so hard and long to earn.

Big surprise.

Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and US President Makes Up Constitutional Quotes During State Of The Union (SOTU) Address.

Consider this:

1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a “lawyer”. He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A “Voluntary Surrender” is not something where you decide “Gee, a license is not really something I need anymore, is it?” and forget to renew your license. No, a “Voluntary Surrender” is something you do when you’ve been accused of something, and you ‘voluntarily surrender” your license five seconds before the state suspends you.

2 Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993 after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud!

3. Facts.Source: http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license.

4. A senior lecturer is one thing, a fully ranked law professor is another. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago .

5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school-but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.

6. “He did not hold the title of Professor of Law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law.

Source: http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html

7. The former Constitutional Senior Lecturer (Obama) cited the US Constitution the other night during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence … not the Constitution.

8. The B-Cast posted the video: http://www.breitbart.tv/did-obama-confuse-the-constitution-with-the-declaration-of-independence.

9. Free Republic : In the State of the Union Address, President Obama said:  “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal.”

10. Um, wrong citing, wrong founding document there Champ, I mean Mr. President. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later in the same speech?

When you are a phony it’s hard to keep facts straight. Keep this moving — educate others

PS  November 2, 2014, 4:23 PM:  I just checked snopes.com which specializes in shooting down phony statements and found the following: No statement of denial!  (Jerome  S. Kaufman)

1. snopes.com: Barack and Michelle Obama’s Law Licenses: 

…Taking License Claim: Barack and Michelle Obama both surrendered their law licenses to avoid pending disciplinary actions.  Example: [Collected via…
…night that mentioned Michelle Obama had no law license. This struck me as odd, since (a) she went to school to be a lawyer, and (b) she just recently…
Sun, 02 Nov 2014 12:23:36 GMT http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp 

II Video – Obama’s view of the world and US citizens in 19 seconds. You must see this to truly understand with whom you are dealing whether he had to surrender his law license or not.

Please copy and paste to your search engine. http://stg.do/mfuh

PS Needless to say, I have been getting all kinds of criticism for daring to question the Obama credentials. I have seen many of their credentials before, like his phony birth certificate and am unimpressed by his loyal followers.

And then, this beautiful comment came in from an astute reader that confirmed my heartfelt misgivings. Here it is:

“This expose’ of the Obamas has been around for years. I prefer to believe the claim against them despite the left wing, George Soros bankrolled Snopes and “Factcheck”, the other liberal apologists. We do not have to take their word for what is true in this situation. Prove to me that it isn’t.”

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

The Democratic Embrace of Al Sharpton

The man who embodied New York’s sick old days of the 1980s now wields influence as never beforeat City Hall and in the White House.

By HEATHER MAC DONALD

Wall Street Journal Oct. 25-26, 2014

The Rev. Al Sharpton once epitomized New York’s bad old days of the 1980s, when the then-corpulent, gold-medallion-bedecked tub thumper inflamed racial hatred and courted violence. Today, against all expectations and at least 100 pounds lighter, he has been rehabilitated into the Democratic Party’s civil-rights leader of choice! Has Mr. Sharpton changed or simply outlasted his critics?

President Obama’s embrace of Mr. Sharpton has been particularly intense this year. He called Mr. Sharpton’s radio show to discuss the Nov. 4 elections. In April the president appeared at a political rally organized by Mr. Sharpton’s National Action Network. Mr. Obama’s closest adviser, Valerie Jarrett, conferred with Mr. Sharpton in August about the police killing of an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Mo., as Mr. Sharpton led protests against the Ferguson police.

The Democratic establishment is just as obsequious. It turned out in force earlier this month to celebrate Mr. Sharpton’s 60th birthday party at New York’s tony Four Seasons restaurant. Hillary Clinton phoned in with best wishes. Barack and Michelle Obama sent a congratulatory letter. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo gushed: “He’s the nation’s Rev. Sharpton—and the nation is better for it.” New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman , Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand , and Reps. Charles Rangel and Jerry Nadler rushed to pay their respects. Worrying as it might be for America to see Mr. Sharpton catapulted into the national limelight, that is nothing compared with the alarm felt by many New Yorkers now witnessing his emergence as a political power in their city.

When New Yorkers elected Bill de Blasio as mayor last year, they knew they were getting a self-styled “progressive” who pledged to soak the rich and shackle the New York Police Department. What they didn’t know was that they were also voting to bring Al Sharpton and his influence into the very heart of City Hall. The mayor’s alliance with the racial provocateur is now creating the biggest crisis of his mayoralty. So far, Mr. de Blasio is pretending not to notice.

As the crisis escalated, involving a former Sharpton aide now working for the mayor’s wife, Mr. de Blasio ladled on the praise at the Four Seasons. “Al Sharpton has been a blessing for this city,” the mayor enthused. “He’s been a blessing for this nation and the more people criticize him, the more I want to hang out with him. Because a lot of times, just look who’s doing the criticizing and the way they’re saying it, it makes you realize the Rev must be doing something right. You know, sometimes, your enemies are the best endorsers of the righteousness of your actions.”

Where to start in evaluating what a “blessing” Al Sharpton has been to New York and America? For those who have forgotten or are too young to recall, here is a brief history of the man now so warmly embraced by the mayor, the governor and the president. There was Mr. Sharpton’s frenzied involvement in the Tawana Brawley case. In 1987 Ms. Brawley, a 15-year-old African-American, concocted a tale of being raped by six white males. The allegation was ultimately revealed as a hoax, but not before Mr. Sharpton had commandeered the racially incendiary story and poured fuel on it by accusing a white county prosecutor of having been among the attackers. The prosecutor, Steven Pagones, won a defamation suit in 1998 against Mr. Sharpton, Ms. Brawley and her lawyers. Mr. Sharpton refused to pay the judgment against him, which was eventually discharged by a group of supporters.

In 1991 a Hasidic driver in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights accidentally ran onto a sidewalk and killed a 7-year-old black child named Gavin Cato. Mr. Sharpton led protesters in angry cries of “No justice, no peace,” criticized “Jewish diamond merchants” in the neighborhood for selling goods from apartheid South Africa, and spoke at a rally where a banner said, “Hitler did not do the job.” During three days of violence following the accident, rioters beat to death an Australian rabbinical student named Yankel Rosenbaum.

In 1995 Mr. Sharpton led a protest in Harlem to stop a Jewish landlord—a “white interloper” in Mr. Sharpton’s words—from evicting a black-operated record shop. One of the protesters would later set fire to the store, killing seven store employees.

Mr. Sharpton has never apologized for his involvement in the Brawley hoax. Nor has he taken responsibility for his agitation in Crown Heights. In 2008 the Associated Press reported that Mr. Sharpton and his business entities owed nearly $1.5 million in taxes and penalties, as well as tens of thousands of dollars in fines for unpaid workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance. By this year Mr. Sharpton’s tax liabilities had ballooned to $4.7 million, according to the New York Post.

He still owes the Federal Election Commission $208,000 for the improper use of campaign money during his 2004 presidential bid. Not relevant, apparently, to Mr. Sharpton’s increasing reach into Democratic circles. Mr. Sharpton believes that New York’s mayor owes him his job—a belief shared, it seems, by Mr. de Blasio himself. Mr. Sharpton pointedly declined to endorse the sole black candidate in the Democratic primary last year. That left the field open for a late-surging Mr. de Blasio, who had run a demagogic campaign against the New York Police Department, denouncing its stop-question-and-frisk policies as racist. Candidate de Blasio also pandered to black voters by prominently featuring his biracial son in campaign ads.

“We won the election,” Mr. Sharpton later told CBS New York. Mr. de Blasio’s first offering of thanks was to hire Mr. Sharpton’s longtime public-relations adviser as his wife’s $170,000-a-year chief of staff. Such a position was unprecedented, but the choice of Rachel Noerdlinger to fill it was even more startling.  It put an Al Sharpton confidante at the center of city power.

Next, Mayor de Blasio implied that Mr. Sharpton was a major player in police affairs. In late July the mayor convened a meeting of “community advocates” to discuss the death of a black man following the man’s arrest for selling untaxed loose cigarettes. Mr. Sharpton’s inevitable protests against the NYPD had blamed the death on the enforcement of public-order laws, including the ban on selling loose cigarettes.

Such enforcement is key to “broken windows” policing—stopping minor crimes as a way of preventing major ones. Mr. Sharpton was led in to the mayor’s community meeting by his former aide, Ms. Noerdlinger, and seated on Mr. de Blasio’s left, with Police Commissioner William Bratton , serving his second tour as New York’s top law officer, on the mayor’s right. The symbolism was lost on no one, least of all police officers. The next day, a mock NYPD identification card circulated through police headquarters showing Mr. Sharpton as commissioner.

By the time of the Four Seasons birthday blowout, the mayor’s Noerdlinger-Sharpton connection was turning toxic. As the local press reported, the 43-year-old single mother had failed to disclose in her City Hall background check that she was living with an unemployed ex-convict who had served time for fatally shooting a man over a jacket and for drug dealing. The boyfriend, Hassaun McFarlan, had referred to the police as “pigs” on his now-vanished Facebook page. Ms. Noerdlinger had received a waiver of the city’s residency requirement by citing her teenage son’s need to continue a physical-therapy regime in New Jersey following a traffic accident. She didn’t mention that he was fit enough to play linebacker on his high-school football team. Like Mr. McFarlan, that son has referred to the police as “pigs” on social media, and he has tweeted: “I’m convinced all white people are the devil.”

Ms. Noerdlinger has a federal tax lien against her, typical of the Sharpton inner circle, but failed to report it to the city’s conflict of interest board. She has been involved to varying degrees in McFarlan-related dust-ups with the law, including hundreds of dollars in unpaid traffic tickets issued to her Mercedes-Benz since her City Hall job began. Mayor de Blasio has refused to discuss the implications for his administration of these and other revelations. Nor has he disciplined Ms. Noerdlinger for her multiple omissions on city background checks.

Police morale is plummeting, given the mayor’s stubborn allegiance to a former Sharpton aide and the seeming elevation of Mr. Sharpton to near-parity with Police Commissioner Bratton. Cops in certain high-crime precincts have all but abandoned pedestrian stops, which candidate de Blasio had so fiercely criticized. As for Mr. Sharpton, he portrays the Noerdlinger fiasco as a conspiracy to bring down the de Blasio mayoralty and Mr. Sharpton’s connection to it.

After leading a few rounds of “no justice, no peace” on a recent Saturday at his National Action Network headquarters—still little more than a shabby storefront despite the millions shoveled into it by supplicant corporate donors—Mr. Sharpton told his supporters: “They will keep trying to prevent [the mayor] from transforming this city, whether it’s Rachel—Ms. Noerdlinger—or it’s someone else.”

When Mayor de Blasio and his wife reached out and said they wanted Rachel to come, I said: ‘Don’t think that they won’t put a target on your back. They’ll find something. They gonna think I cut some deal,’ ” The longer Mayor de Blasio sticks by Ms. Noerdlinger, the more it will appear that the mayor did cut a deal. But firing her would invite Mr. Sharpton’s wrath, jeopardizing Mr. de Blasio’s hopes for a second term.

Worse, Mr. Sharpton is demanding an end to broken-windows policing, while Commissioner Bratton has vowed to continue it. Mayor de Blasio cannot satisfy both men. Despite Mr. Sharpton’s current mainstream patina, his stock-in-trade has changed little from his Tawana Brawley-Crown Heights days, as the disintegration of his inflammatory narrative about the police shooting in Ferguson, Mo., demonstrates. Apart from rare forays into the rhetoric of personal responsibility, he still peddles the dangerous lie that police officers are the greatest threat facing young black men and that racial discrimination is the main force holding blacks back. In fact, it is other young black men who are responsible for the high homicide risk faced by black teens, and it is proactive policing that has dramatically reduced that risk, saving thousands of young lives in places like New York City.

Mr. Sharpton’s longevity as a public figure rests on the enduring power of racial grievance to elevate those politicians who accede to it, while distracting attention from the family and social breakdown afflicting the black community. Mayor de Blasio’s Sharpton predicament is nevertheless a cautionary tale about the risks of getting too close to the Reverend Al.

Ms. Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute.


Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com


Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

Around the time of Rosh Hashanah (The Jewish New Year) I like to publish a not so friendly reminder of how the Gentile world has treated the Jew over the centuries. Unfortunately, this tragedy is being repeated — this time by the Muslims and with the help of many of the same Gentile executioners who, along with many Jews,  lied, “Never Again.”

Compiled by Jerome S. Kaufman from many of the weekly entries in the Jewish Press listed by Columnist Jeff Reznik.  Clarifying embellishments, usually in italics have been added by JSK.

This is a very partial list of important dates in the history. Please note that when it comes to the recording of the dates in ancient history, there are many disagreements between various biblical and temporal sources. But, no matter. The end results are the same.

There is nothing new about anti-Semitism. Successive Gentile and now Muslim generations continue to use the Jew as a useful, fail-safe, defenseless tool to blame for their own failures — frequently when there is not a Jew in sight! JSK

2121 BCE – Jews entered biblical Canaan, their intended homeland with G-d’s guidance

2105 BCE Noah’s arc ends its journey on Mt. Arafat marking end of the flood

1812 BCE – Abraham was born

1696 BCE – Abraham, with complete dedication to the commands of G-d, took his son to Mt. Moriah, bond him and prepared to sacrifice him following G-d’s instructions. This became the future site of the Hebrew Holy Temple in Jerusalem (that the Arabs deliberately built over and call their own, dating to their conquest of the land some  1400 years later. They, with the usual figments of their imagination, describe themselves as the original occupants!  And, the lies continue and aggrandize to this very day while the Israelis watch with their thumbs in their mouths, not challenging this obvious gross historical lie.

1568 BCE – Reuven, Jacob’s first son was born to Leah

1556 BCE – Jacob left his father-in-law, Laban’s home , the father of Rachel. Labron had taken advantage of Jacob making him work for him for  14 plus years after his staged marriage of Jacob to Leah

1555 BCE Birth of Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th son to Rachel and Jacob

1532 BCE Joseph released from Egyptian prison to begin the history of the Hebrews eventual exodus from Egypt to establish Israel’s homeland in Canaan.

1392 BCE – Birth of Moses who  lived for 120 years

1312 BCE Egyptians smitten with plague of darkness (Choshech). One of the 10 plagues assessed upon them by Hashem forcing them to let his people go, as  commemorated at the Passover service.

1312 BCE – Moses ascended Mt. Sinai to receive the Torah

1311 BCE – Moses sent spies to report on the lay of the land in Canaan

1290 BCE Jews left Egypt - (Big debate over some of these BCE dates — obviously don’t always correlate.)

1274 BCE Death of Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, age 126

1273 BCE Jews crossed Jordan to Jericho to receive G-d’s gift of Canaan to become Israel, homeland of the Jews.

1243 BCE – death of Joshua, Moses successor

722 BCE Assyrian conquest of 10 Israeli Tribes of North and their disappearance — the 10 lost tribes. Judah remained as the Southern kingdom and from which all subsequent Jews are descended

586 BCE – First Temple destroyed by Babylonians, The siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in 588 BCE (In the Jewish year 3408, the son of Queen Esther of Persia and King Ahasuerus). King Darius later permitted the return of the Jews to Israel and the rebuilding of the Second Temple (Ezra 4:24). )

520 BCE – Second Temple completed. Begun 537 BCE

515 BCE Esther meets King Achashveirosh and saves the Jews from extinction by Haman (Celebrated in the holiday of Purim)

4 BCE death of king Herod, King (37 – 4 BCE) Beginning of Christian Era

70 CE – Romans destroyed Second Temple and forced Jewish Diaspora from their biblical homeland.

5th CE Persia – Religious persecution prevented Jews from saying their daily prayers

1095 Nov 26, First Crusade began

1096 Jews in Germany killed by First Crusaders as they plundered through Europe on way to Holy Land

1096 Crusaders kill 297 of the 300 Jews in German town of Eller in 2 day massacre

1099 First Crusade attacked Jerusalem

1105 Death of Rashi, author of commentaries on the Bible and Talmud

1163  China – Kaifeng’s Jews built a large and beautiful synagogue, which was subsequently renovated and rebuilt on numerous occasions throughout the centuries. At its peak, during the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), the Kaifeng Jewish community may have numbered as many as 5,000 people. By the 17th century, a number of Chinese Jews had attained high ranks in the Chinese civil service, but along with success, came the blight of assimilation, which took an increasingly heavy toll on the community and its cohesion. As a result, by the mid-1800s, the Chinese Jews’ knowledge and practice of Judaism had largely faded away. The last rabbi of the community is believed to have died in the early part of the 19th century, and the synagogue was all but destroyed by a series of floods which struck the city in the 1840s and thereafter.

1189 London. Prominent Jews barred and attacked attempting to attend coronation of Richard Lion Hearted,  30 killed, began in Norwich Eng.  Some escaped to bishop’s castle.

1190 Crusaders arrived in Stanford, England on the way to the Holy Land where they brutalized, stole all their money and murdered hundreds of the “Murderers of our Lord” officially called “Christ Killers”  en passant.

1209 Pope Innocent III launched a crusade against the town of Beziers, France. 200 Jews were killed

1221 – Jews of Erfurt Germany falsely accused of ritual murder, synagogue stormed, Jews given choice of conversion or death, tortured, killed, synagogue burned down.

1244 Pope Innocent) IV – ordered 24 cartloads of the Talmud burned

1253 Pope Innocent IV allowed expulsion of Jews from France

1260 Jews expelled from England in 1260 and would not be allowed to return until 1656

1267 Jews of Silesia forced to wear skull cap in public appearances

1269 – King Louis IX ordered all Jews in France to wear a yellow badge

1278 Jews were ordered to attend theological sermons, delivered by Christians, by decree of Pope Nicholas III

1283 Jews of France forbidden to repair their synagogues by decree of King Phillip the Bold

1290 Jews expelled by Edward I from England

1322 Jews expelled from France again

1348 Jews of Zurich, Switzerland accused of ritual murder, driven out and killed

1349 Black death torture and killing of Jews in Germany

1349 Feb 14 – Jews of Strasbourg Alsace were falsely accused of poisoning wells. 2000 men, women and children were placed in a huge pyre and burned to death.

1391 5000 Jews killed in Seville, Spain

1394 Jews expelled from France again by King Charles VI

1396 – Jews in Austria have their civil rights suspended

1415 CE – Pope Benedict XIII – bull condemning Torah

1427 – Jews expelled from Berne Switzerland

1492 Jews expelled from Spain and Sicily

1492 Aug. Christopher Columbus, some claim was Jewish,  sailed with many Jews believed aboard, escaping the Spanish Inquisition. The navigators of the 3 boats were Jews, a profession to which Jews gravitated at the time.

1496 Jews expelled from Burgsdorf, Switzerland

1498 Death of Tomas de Torquemada, Leader of Spanish Inquisition

1516  Ghetto established for Jews in Venice, Italy

1539 Jews expelled from Hungary

1567 Jews expelled from Genoa, Italy

1567 Jews, decreed by Regent Don Henrique, not allowed to settle in Brazil

1567 Jews to no longer aloud to settle in Brazil

1569 The Inquisition was established in South America 1569 Inquisition established in S. America

1569 Jews expelled from Papal State by Pope Pius V

1648 Jews escaping from Russian Chmielnicki massacres fled to a fortified castle in Polonnoye Ukraine where 10,000 were massacred.

1655 Peter Stuyvesant thwarted in his attempt to expel Jews from New Amsterdam by the Dutch West India Company

1656, March 13 Permission denied to build a synagogue in New Amsterdam (later NYC) by Governor Peter Stuyvesant.

1656 Jewish burial in a Jewish cemetary became legal in New Amsterdam. How good of the Goyim!

1656 Jewish community of Amsterdam excommunicated Baruch Spinoza

1670  Jews of Vienna, Austria – Emperor Leopold I expelled 4000 Jews unless convert, Great Synagogue burned down and replaced by church St. Margaret

1675 Death of Bogdan Chmielnicki, who was responsible for Cossacks murder of 300,000 Jews

1716 – Jews expelled from Brussels

1727 – Jews expelled from Ukraine by Empress Catherine I

1731 – Vatican librarian Costanzi led search parties to all Jewish quarters throughout Papal States to confiscate Jewish holy books. This would continue for decades.

1737 – NY Assembly disallowed Jews to vote.

1742 Jews expelled from Great Russia by Empress Elizabeth

1745 Jews expelled from Prague

1760 Death of Baal Shem Tov,

1763 Cornerstone of Touro Synagogue laid in Newport, RI

1765 Chair created at Harvard College for study of Hebrew

1791 Pale of Settlement forced upon Jews by Empress Catherine. Jews allowed no where else in Russia

1774 Jews expelled from Prague by Empress Maria Theresa

1798 Rabbi Schneur Zalman was released from St Petersburg prison, Founder of Lubavitch dynasty and author of Tanya

1808 Napoleon required all Jews in France to use surnames

1816 Jews expelled from Lubeck, Germany

1835 Jews of Hebron, Palestine attacked by Ibrahim Pasha and his army

1838 Arabs attack the Jews of Safed, Israel (Thus Jews were killed by Arabs in Israel 110 years before State of Israel founded)

1861 Pres. Abe Lincoln moved to change the law so that Jews could serve as chaplains in the army.

1868 Dec. Romanian Jews prohibited from being Drs.

1868 The KKK lynched a Jew named S.A. Bierfield in Franklin. TN on some trumped up charge

1873 Yar ziet of first Jewish Mayor of London, Sir David Salomons

1881 Pogroms in Konotop and Waslikov Russia against Jews, continued for 3 years

1897 Theodore Hertzl published Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State), preparing for the disaster he believed was coming.

1899 Romanian Jews blacklisted from Universities

1901 Arabs attacked Jews of Gedera, Palestine

1902 Formation of Union of Orthodox Rabbis in US and Canada

1903 Russia outlawed Zionism and funding Zionism (First Zionist Congress with Theodore Herzl 1899, Herzl died July 3, 1904)

1909 Dagania Alegh founded in Palestine

1909 Long before becoming Hitler’s  “Willing Executioners” of Jews  - Polish Legionnaires looted and burned Jewish section of Vilna during 4 day pogrom. Hundreds of Jews murdered and arrested and tortured.

1909 City of Tel Aviv founded in Palestine, became Israel 1948

1917, November 17 The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild declaring the right of the Jews to repossess their homeland in Palestine showing a boundary map extending all the way from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates River to the east as was described in the Hebrew Bible.

1917 Dec. 9, British took Jerusalem from defeated Ottoman Empire

1921 May 7, Arabs attacked the first Jewish settlement of Petach Tikva, killed 3 and drove them out. But, the Jews returned another day and the city now number in 2010 210,341, Baruch Hashem

1921 Arab riots in then Palestine killed dozens of Jews in Jaffa

1924 Nov 23, City of Herzliya, Israel founded in honor of Theodore Herzl

1929 Arabs attacked Jews throughout Palestine. Many Jews beaten and killed. The attack in Hebron was particularly brutal. Arabs using swords attacked men, women, children and students. 67 Jews including 23 Yeshiva students were killed.

1935 Sep 15, Hitler published Nuremberg Laws against Jews stripping them of all their civil rights

1935 Death of Colonel Alfred Dreyfus of French Army, falsely accused of treason and framed at trial. Finally exonerated through efforts of author, Emile Zola.

1936 Dec 26 – Palestinian Philharmonic (all Jews) played for first time under the baton of Arturo Toscanini (In what is now Israel). Note: (Palestinian was the designation for Jews in the Holy Land, until Yasir Arafat was clever enough to abscond with the term and the Arabs of Palestine suddenly became the “Palestinians” instead of just plain Arabs. By this very clever switch of nomenclature, the  Jews became the invading Jews on ‘occupied ‘ ‘Arab Land’ and the world bought into this gargantuan lie. The Jews and present State of Israel have not even bothered to vigorously dispute this obvious propaganda distortion that has proven so successful)

1938 Evian Conference July 6 to 15 at Évian-les-Bains, France . Representatives from 32 countries and 39 private organizations and some 24 voluntary organizations, convened by Franklin Roosevelt, met formally to decide if the West would accept the displaced Jews of Europe,  They voted not to!  Golda Meir, the attendee from Palestine was not permitted to speak or to participate except as an observer. Some 200 international journalists gathered at Évian to observe and report the conclave. This event should remain for the Jews a significant conference and all that Jews need to know to formulate their own personal lives and that of the State of Israel. Thank you to C.B. Whyte for this entry.

1938 Nov 9-10 Kristallnacht in Germany – Synagogues, shops, cemeteries, anything Jewish attacked in Germany and Austria.

1938 Nov.17 Italian version of Nuremberg laws published

 

1939 May Nuremberg Laws in Germany, stripping Jews of their civil rights

1940 May 1, Churchill replaced Chamberlain

1940 Battle of Britain raged against the Germans

1940 Feb 200,000 Jews of Lodz, Poland moved into Baluty Ghetto

1940 Aug. 4 – Death of Vladimir (Z’ev) Jabotinsky – Ardent Zionist leader, orator, writer, linguist, poet, journalist, Founder of Revisionist Zionism, who spent years begging the Jews to leave Europe before it was too late and was despised for his efforts and called an alarmist. 6 million exterminated Jews resulted from ignoring his warnings.

’1941 June Vichy France warplanes bomb Tel Aviv, 20 Jews killed

1941 July – 200 Torahs gathered from synagogues in Poland and burned in special ceremony. Later that day, Heinrich Himmler arranged for the creation of the Maidanek murder camp in Lublin Poland

1941 Nazis and Willing Executor Latvians killed 2300 Jews in Riga

1941 Sep 29 Babi Yar Ravine – Took Germans just 2 days to machine gun to death 33,771 Jews in this ravine near Kiev

1941 Dec 8, Birkeneku – 1500 older Jews from Riga ghetto slaughtered by SS in forest.

1941 June 22, Hitler turns against Soviet Union

1941 June – Germans occupy Lithuania and begin the round up and slaughter of Jews with plenty of willing Lithuanian fellow executioners.

1941 July 7, Ukrainians joined the party and murdered 1200 Jews near town of Otynia, Poland. So, do I really care if Russians kill Ukrainians or vice versa?  And, you can throw in the Pollacks, the Latvians, the Estonians, the Lithuanians, etc., and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Makes me no never mind.

1941 Sep 29 – Babi Yar ravine, near Kiev. Russia – over 2 day period, Nazis shot to death 33,771 Jews – the single largest mass murder of the Holocaust

Nov 4, 1941, 483 locals killed by Nazis ending the Jewish presence in village.

1941 Dec 10, Hitler declares war on US after Pearl Harbor December 7, 1941

1941 Dec. Weeks of rampage ended with the death of 32,000 Jews in Vilna, Poland

1942. Sept Jews of Lida Poland Ghetto, 10,000 killed

1942, Feb. Himmler selects 80 Jews from Auschwitz for his skeletal collection museum at Univ. of Strasbourg. Murdered by lethal injection and then corpses burned to prevent damage to their bones to become part of Nazi planned Jewish museum of an extinct people they had deliberately exterminated. (Too bad we don’t have a museum of Nazi German bones to display )

1942 July – The German Nazi SS murdered 10,000 Jews in the ghetto of Minsk, Byelorussia.

1942 Aug 21 SS Nazis murdered 2750 Jews of Lancut, Poland in Falkinia forest

1942 – 600,000 Jews murdered in Hungary by the Hungarians as 1943 After the beginning of WWII in 1941, the Allied fleet had regained the Mediterranean as its own lake.

1944 600,000 Jews killed in Hungary by Hitler’s Germans and Hungarian Willing Executioners. The Hungarian Gov’t March 2014, 70 years later, still denies complicity

1944 – March 7, 99,941 Jews gassed in Auschwitz during that day

1944 October – Anne Frank transferred from Auschwitz to Bergen Belsen where she died.

1945 April 12, Buchenwald murder camp liberated by US Army. From 1938-1945 238,000 Jews were held there. 56,000 murdered.

1945 Feb 12 Death of Hadassah founder Henrietta Szold

1945 May 2 – Goebbels and wife Magda poisoned their 6 children and then committed suicide.

1945 May 4, Germany surrenders unconditionally.

1945 May Dachau Concentration Camp liberated.

1946 42 Jews killed by Pollocks when they returned to Kielce to claim their homes occupied by Poles when Nazis left

1946 June, British arrested 100 Jewish Agency leaders in Palestine – hundreds of others rounded up, called Black Shabbos.

1947 Nov 29 – UN agreed to partition Palestine between Jews and Arabs with the Jews getting the short end, as usual, and given a sliver piece of territory that the UN thought would never survive the onslaught by surrounding Arabs they had armed to the teeth.  But this time the Jews depended upon themselves and they, thanks to G-d, prevailed over 5 Arabs armies coming in from all sides.

1947 Dec. Jordanians laid siege to Jerusalem, 40 Jews killed at Haifa oil facility

1948 May 14 – Declaration of Israel Independence, Yom Ha’Atzmaut

1948 May 15 5 Arab nations (Egypt,Jordan,Syria,Iraq,Lebanon) attacked immediately attempting to annihilate reborn Jewish State.

1948 800,000 Jews driven out penniless, their properties confiscated by the gov’t of Arab nations in which they had lived for thousands of years. At most, apx. 400,000 Arabs left Israel and swelled to millions under UNESCO, a unique UN relief program just for Palestinian Arabs unlike no other refugees and displaced persons resulting from WWII.

1949 March 10. IDF liberated Eilat

1949 Cheshvan – Jewish Population in Israel reached 1 million people, now, 2013, over 6 million 1949 March David Ben-Gurion formed Israel’s first government, Baruch Hashem.

1950 The passing of Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson, the Sixth Lubavitcher Rabbi,

1951 Jan 17, The succession of Rabbi Menachim Mendel Schneerson as Seventh Lubavitcher Rabbi, above’s son-in-law, delivered his first Maamar confirming his succession. Lyubavichi is a village in District of Smolensk, Russia. existed since at least 1654, had 2500 residents in 1857, large market place, declined with onset of Communism,

1951, May 3 The Israeli Knesset designated this day as Holocaust Memorial Day, Yom HaShoah, under PM David Ben Gurion

1952 Dec. 26 Israel’s first ambassador to Japan presented his credentials to the Emperor (Can you imagine if Abraham, Isaac, Jacob witnessed that one!)

1953 February Soviet Union recalled its ambassador and cut off relations with Israel which had just been reborn May 14, 1948

1960 Adolph Eichmann captured in Argentina , Buenos Aires, where had lived for years, hanged in Israel May 31, 1962, sentenced to death Dec. 15, 1961 for crimes against the Jewish people and humanity

1961 July 31. The one-millionth immigrant arrived in Israel. Israel reborn in 1948. Up until that time, Britain severely limited the number of Jews they would allow into their biblical homeland. In the meantime, not one so-called Palestinian refugee was absorbed by the 21 huge sparsely populated Arab states that surrounded Israel. They preferred to keep them as political ploys paid for in camps financed by the UN and mostly the US!

1963 First Jewish Governor of NY elected – Herbert H. Lehman

1967 Six Day War – June 6, 1967 – After just 36 hours of fighting, the IDF were deep into Sinai, captured Gaza, Kalkilya, Jenin in Samarian Hills and surrounded Jerusalem. Israelis

June 28, 1967 Israel regained and annexed Jerusalem after over 1900 years of exile following Roman Conquest 70 CE

1969 Death of Levi Eshkol – former Israel PM (right after Ben Gurion)

1970 Libya All Jewish property confiscated and Jews driven out penniless, no compensation ever since

1973 Nov. 6 – New York City elects its first Jewish mayor, Abraham D. Beame

1973 Henry Kissinger, First Jewish Sec’y of State sworn in, under Nixon

1975 Nov 10 General Assembly of United Nations declared Zionism a form of racism

1976 Entebbe rescue of over 100 Jews in airport Uganda.  Jonathan Netanyahu, Bibi’s older brother killed.

1977 Nov. 20 Egyptian Pres. Anwar Sadat addressed Knesset,

1977 Dec Menachim Begin met with Sadat at Ismalia, Egypt.

1978 Sep 17 – Carter/Begin/Sadat Camp David talks ended. Peace agreement with Egypt was signed a few months later and Anwar Sadat assassinated in Egypt by Arabs opposed to peace with Israel.

1980 Israel’s embassy in Egypt, the first of its kind in any Arab country, was established in 1980, soon after the Camp David peace treaty was signed in 1979

1981 June 7, Israel destroys Iraq nuclear weapon

Above data compiled from entries, over several years, by Jeff@jreznikstudios.com in the Jewish Press.

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

II Pat Condell in educational video illuminating the real “Palestinians”

By FLOYD ABRAMS

Wall Street Journal

Oct. 15, 2014

The Metropolitan Opera in New York presented  John Adam’s opera, ‘The Death of Klinghoffer.’  The organization’s decision to mount the production has already spurred protests, with more to come.

A too-brief summary: In 1985 Leon Klinghoffer, a 69-year-old disabled man, and his wife, Marilyn, were passengers on an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro. The ship was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists, who shot Klinghoffer in the head and threw him overboard in his wheelchair.

John Adams is a serious artist, recognized as a leading creator of modern operas. “The Death of Klinghoffer,” first produced in 1991, contains a running debate between the killers—who voice a number of undisguisedly anti-Semitic slurs in the course of justifying their conduct—and their victim. Protesters are demanding that the opera be canceled; defenders couch their position, as has the New York Times , in terms of artistic freedom or—as one letter-writer to the Times put it—of helping us “understand the anger, frustration and grievances of other people.”

So, in Joan Rivers’s much repeated phrase, can we talk? Some things are easy. Mr. Adams’s opera is protected by the First Amendment and so is the Metropolitan Opera in its decision to offer it. It would be a gross and obvious constitutional violation if government sought to bar the opera from being publicly produced or imposed any punishment for doing so.

Beyond that, canceling any public artistic performance because it expresses unpopular or even outrageous views is dangerous. I represented the Brooklyn Museum when then-New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani in 1999 sought to shut it down because he viewed some of its art—I use his language now—as “sick,” “disgusting” and sacrilegious. I argued then, successfully, that the mayor’s conduct violated the First Amendment.

But the controversy over the Adams opera cannot be dealt with by simple reference to the First Amendment or artistic freedom. Those who direct the Metropolitan Opera made a choice when they decided to offer Mr. Adams’s opera, and it is altogether fitting that they be publicly judged by that choice.

Suppose the opera had been about a different murder and the Met offered an intense, two-sided operatic discussion of the desirability of the murder of, say, President Kennedy in a work called “The Death of JFK.” Or a production about the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., which singers on the “side” of that assassination offer racist views in support of the murder. Or how about one on the death of one of the thousands of victims of the 9/11 attack that contained an extended operatic debate between her killers and herself about whether her death was justified.

Surely we recoil at all of these. They all would be protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is basically—and gloriously—content-neutral. It protects not only enduring works of art but also the dregs of human imagination, ranging from films of animals being tortured and killed to the publication of “Mein Kampf.” But it is inconceivable that the Metropolitan Opera would have chosen to offer the public any of the operas I have just hypothesized.

Why then offer one that equates—sympathetically, no less—the murderers of Leon Klinghoffer with their victim? “Grievances” there may be on both sides in the Middle East conflict, but there was no moral justification for the murder of Klinghoffer. John Adams has defended his focus on the motivation of the killers by saying that it helps to explain “what in the mythology that they grew up with, forced them or dared them to take this action.”

But the killers were not “forced” to murder Klinghoffer. Nor were they dared to do so. They chose to commit their crime. So did Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray and Osama bin Laden. We can expect no arias to be sung in their defense at the Metropolitan Opera, and there is no justification for any to be sung for the Klinghoffer killers.

Suppose the Oxford Union proposed a debate on the topic of Mr. Adams’s opera and it was phrased this way—“Resolved that the killing of Leon Klinghoffer was justified.” Suppose you were asked to take the negative side of that debate and to argue that he should not have been murdered. Would you do so? I hope not. I hope you would say that the subject is not one on which any rational, let alone morally justifiable, debate is possible. One can argue passionately about the Middle East, Israel or Palestinians, but nothing makes the Klinghoffer murder morally tolerable.

The great scholar Alexander Bickel recalled in “The Morality of Consent” (1975) that he had heard that in the tumultuous late 1960s a crowd had gathered outside an ROTC building at a great university, where members of the faculty joined students discussing “the question whether or not to set fire to the building.” The faculty members, Bickel surmised, took the negative, the matter was ultimately voted on, and the affirmative side narrowly won. Bickel’s conclusion: The “negative taken by the faculty was only one side of a debate which the faculty rendered legitimate by engaging in it. Where nothing is unspeakable, nothing is undoable.”

That’s where I come out on the Met’s decision to offer this opera. What Prof. Bickel wrote applies here: Where nothing is unspeakable, nothing is undoable. Leon Klinghoffer’s murder was an unspeakable act. Period. His demise is not a proper subject of debate, only of mourning. And of how best to prevent future murderous attacks.

Mr. Abrams is a senior partner in the law firm Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP. This op-ed is adapted from a lecture to given at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.

Video by Pat Condell: The “Palestinian Motivation in the real world”

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

A Naval Disaster in the Making. The misbegotten plan to shrink the US submarine fleet.

BY SETH CROPSEY

The Weekly Standard,  October 6, 2014

The US Navy’s latest shipbuilding plan would see its attack submarine fleet diminish from 55 to 41 boats in the next decade and a half. That decision, confirmed in August, was eclipsed by the advance of ISIL, war in Gaza, and sedition in Ukraine. But the Navy’s announcement—the single-largest strategic consequence of this administration’s defense cuts—has the most far-reaching ramifications of the summer’s events.

The United States faces the prospect of drawn-out tension leading to possible conflict on two fronts, the Middle East and the Far East. Of the two, Chinese ambition will require more attention. It is supported by growing wealth, expanding military power, and abundant patience. The challenges these generate are likely to remain a century from now. China’s leadership, meanwhile, will confront a host of problems in the next 15 years—when the US attack submarine fleet will be a quarter smaller than it is today—including an aging population that can’t sustain the optimistic predictions for China’s economy.

As Nick Eberstadt notes, 15 years from now, because of the preference for male babies, 20 to 40 percent of rural, uneducated 30-year-old Chinese men will not be able to find mates—with large and unknowable possibilities for turmoil. Over the same period, competing regional markets’ lower labor, utility, and rent costs will becalm the expanding economy on which China’s authoritarian leaders have justified their rule. A multitude of state-owned industries employing millions are already seeing the loans they need to stay afloat failing to perform; more could follow.

Equally troubling is a political class whose hegemonic ambition matches its contempt for international agreements. Consider the National People’s Congress decision to renege on China’s 1984 signed promise to allow Hong Kong’s political arrangements to continue intact for 50 years. In August, Hong Kong’s voters were told that they will select their senior political official in the 2017 elections from a slate approved by a mostly pro-Beijing nominating committee. At the same time, China’s increasing challenges to many of its neighbors over territorial issues in the international waters of the South and East China Seas are nourishing a spirit in surrounding states that could mature into determined opposition. In short, China’s internal pressures are mounting in parallel with external aggression.

China, however, possesses one advantage not of its own making. The chances that the United States will be there to organize and lead the states that fear China are dimming as the gulf between the ships the Navy needs and the ships it can afford widens. What China will have to show for throwing its weight around in the region depends on what the United States does to preserve its dominance as a Pacific naval power. On that score, the strategic importance of the Navy’s decision to cut its attack submarine fleet by 25 percent cannot be overstated.

Beijing aims to keep the US Navy out of range of Asia. Its large investments in naval aviation, cyber warfare, a modernizing surface and submarine fleet, a fledgling carrier force, and a ballistic missile intended to sink or put out of service US aircraft carriers place at risk our bases in the region and interrupt our communication with allies. If wielded successfully, these measures will assure the safety of China’s navy and mainland and end our run as the West Pacific’s great power.

But China’s strategy is vulnerable—chiefly to submarines. Subs are very difficult to detect and cannot be targeted by missiles while underway. They can demolish an enemy’s fleet and their cruise missiles can destroy targets ashore. As a hedge against China’s anti-access strategy, submarines are matchless. Long-distance drones launched from carriers at a safe distance will eventually offset the dangers of China’s ship-hitting ballistic missiles. Then it will be but a question of time until China adds to its missiles’ range. So long as submarines remain stealthy, they bypass the age-old technological cat-and-mouse game of countering an adversary’s technology and in turn being countered.

Because of its war-fighting abilities, a robust attack submarine fleet is also a highly persuasive deterrent against conflict itself. But the idea of deterrence is missing from Obama administration thinking. When a Chinese jet fighter approached within yards of a US Navy surveillance plane in international air space in mid-August, the State Department sent a disapproving letter. China responded that the United States must cease its patrols over international waters or face more dangerous encounters.

Notwithstanding repeated parallel incidents in international waters against US allies in the region over the past couple of years, China was invited to join the United States and those same Asian allies in an annual U.S.-led naval exercise the previous month. The plan for a diminished attack sub fleet is a broader expression of the Obama administration’s hopeful idea—not shared by Chinese leaders—that there exists no strategic competition between China and the United States.

The president’s refusal to build defenses, (or anything else that will maintain US power) harness them as legitimate instruments of international persuasion, and actually use them is—in conjunction with his skepticism about the morality of American leadership—as responsible for the growing international chaos as it is incapable of preventing its metastasis.

USS George H. W. Bush, for example, which has been using a minuscule portion of its powerful strike force against ISIL for the past few weeks, was the only US aircraft carrier in the region. The two-carrier presence that the United States had previously maintained ended last year as a cost-saving measure and as an encouragement to Iran for a deal over its nuclear weapons program. The single remaining American carrier had been patrolling the northern Arabian Sea supporting the withdrawal of US equipment from Afghanistan. Its departure for the Persian Gulf left a hole in the Afghan mission that could only be filled by ground-based attack planes—which are also scheduled to be withdrawn.

Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin’s ambition for a reborn Russian empire is fanning blazes that begin in Moldova and reach through Crimea, Ukraine, and end—for now—in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Turkey’s Islamist president Recep Tayyip Erdogan openly supports Hamas, has facilitated the transit of Westerners crossing the Syrian border to join ISIL, and holds an international record for the number of imprisoned journalists.

The territory south of Asia Minor is in a turmoil whose end cannot be seen. All these lands are either joined by, or set back from, the Black Sea. The great power conflicts that overlapping areas of interest ignited in the mid-19th-century Crimean War and concentrated again, with bloody results, at Gallipoli six decades later are likely to engage American attention for years.

The paucity of carriers where they are—or might soon be—needed is a here-and-now crisis. But it is congruent with, and a harbinger of, the strategic crisis that will unfold if the political will cannot be found to build the US attack submarine fleet at a rate to assure, at a minimum, its current strength over the next three decades, as events around the globe point toward a darkening future.

Seth Cropsey, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, is the author of Mayday, an account of American seapower’s current challenges. He served as a naval officer and deputy undersecretary of the Navy in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.


Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com


Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

See video below:  Frank Gaffney explains the Jihadist War against America.  (Wake up US and change the Party driving the bus)

I’ve spent my entire professional life fighting for America’s security.

For years now, I’ve sounded the alarm in particular about shariah– the supremacist Islamic doctrine and the global jihadist movement it has spawned to spread this brand of hateful repression worldwide, including here. In countless meetings, articles, congressional testimony, interviews and individual conversations, I’ve explained need to counter this menace.

All too often, my warnings went unheeded. Until recently.

Suddenly, the emergence of the Islamic State (also called ISIS or ISIL)and its reign of terror has awakened Americans to the danger posed by such shariah-adherent jihadis.

The Islamic State invokes shariah to justify the horrific beheadings you and I have witnessed on television and the internet. They have said this is just the beginning. They want Americans to know they have plans to harm our nation. There is reason to believe they are preparing to do so.

I wear a pin on my lapel to start conversations about shariah and those seeking to impose it on the rest of us – including the millions of Muslims who do not practice their faith in accordance with its horrific rules. The pin bears this symbol ن. It’s the Arabic letter “N” that is spray painted on Christian homes by Islamic State fighters to mark them for plunder, rape or murder. “ن ” stands for Nasrani, Arabic for Nazarene – a believer in Jesus of Nazareth, a Christian. These days, under the pall of shariah, it stands for death.

With the emergence of the Islamic State and its explicit pledges to attack us here at home, it is no longer possible to ignore what shariah portends for the freedoms and people you and I hold dear.

Please join me in exposing the ideology of the Islamic State and its ilk – and to arm Americans with information they need to defeat it.

Authoritative reports indicate that the Islamic State is currently training to kill Americans on our own border. Inside the USA, terrorist cells associated with al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and other jihadist franchises are said to be in place, and preparing for violence against us. The average American is unaware this is taking place.

Please join me in my effort to educate our countrymen and women about the very real and present danger the Islamic State and other global jihadists pose to our great nation.

For a small donation to support the efforts of the Center to build awareness, I will send you a Nazarine pin of your own.  To make a donation visit www.nazarenepin.com.

While it may seem like a small action, the lapel pin I wear generates curiosity and interest, and ultimately, an opportunity to share information about the Islamic State and the global jihad of which it is a part. This is where we must start if we are to understand and defeat this growing threat.

Frank Gaffney
President and CEO
Center for Security Policy

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

 

 

 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

 II The Global Warming Statistical Meltdown. The Numbers don’t add up!

Redacted from an article By JUDITH CURRY, Wall Street Journal Oct 10, 2014

(See below)

I  Stop taking environmentalist hypocrites seriously. 

By DREW JOHNSON – The Washington Times – October 6, 2014

Tom Steyer, the hedge fund billionaire-turned-environmentalist, just launched a multimillion-dollar attack-ad blitz that takes political dishonesty to a whole new level. In his latest spot, Mr. Steyer accuses Iowa Senate candidate Joni Ernst of pushing American jobs overseas. In reality, all Mrs. Ernst did was bravely pledge to oppose tax hikes. Watchdog group Politifact judged the ad to be, in a word, “False.”

The ad campaign isn’t just deceptive; it’s hypocritical. As a self-described “professional pain in the [butt],” Mr. Steyer brags he’ll spend $100 million this election cycle to defeat candidates such as Mrs. Ernst who don’t buy in to his particularly sleazy brand of climate-change hysteria. A lot of the money Mr. Steyer now uses to advance his fringe environmental agenda was made off his investments in oil and natural gas.

While managing his hedge fund, Farallon Capital, Mr. Steyer made a killing off the same fossil-fuel industry he is now smearing as greedy and sinister. Mr. Steyer isn’t the first green crusader to secretly owe his wealth or his way of life to fossil fuels. Given the stakes of our nation’s energy debate, Americans should stop taking these environmentalist hypocrites seriously.

Any list of “do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do” environmentalists needs to put former Vice President Al Gore at the top. With his global-warming documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” the former veep established himself an expert on carbon dioxide footprints — and his is massive.

In 2007, using public records, I determined that Mr. Gore’s Nashville mansion devoured more than 220,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity per year — more than 20 times the national average. In some months, his electric bills topped $2,400. During the same year he was touting “An Inconvenient Truth,” a film demanding that Americans reduce their energy consumption, Mr. Gore’s combined electricity and natural-gas bills totaled just under $30,000.

Public pressure eventually forced Mr. Gore to give his Tennessee home a green-friendly overhaul. Since slapping solar panels on his roof, though, Mr. Gore purchased additional properties, and he continues to fly in private jets, even though the resulting carbon dioxide footprint can be more than 100 times greater than flying commercial.

Another elder statesman of enviro-hypocrisy is Robert Redford. The actor urged Americans to embrace “green buildings that use less energy,” but when an environmentally friendly housing development was planned too close to his Napa Valley winery, the actor quashed the project.

Mr. Redford also demands America “kick the oil habit,” despite having served as a paid spokesman for the world’s second-largest airline — no conflict there.

George Soros is a megadonor for environmental groups like the Alliance for Climate Protection and the Union of Concerned Scientists. Both groups are staunchly opposed to fracking, a technology that uses pressurized water and sand to capture oil and natural-gas deposits trapped deep underground. His support for abolishing the drilling technique didn’t stop him from recently buying a $234 million stake in Consol Energy, an avid practitioner of fracking.

Then there’s Bill McKibben. As the head of 350.org, he is a leading advocate for reducing carbon dioxide emissions and killing the Keystone XL pipeline. He’s gone so far as to demonize imported foods, including oranges, because of the fuel consumed to transport them. That hasn’t stopped Mr. McKibben from jetting around the globe to spread his anti-fossil fuel-message. It’s still unclear how this busy jet-fuel-guzzling travel schedule squares with his hard-line views on citrus.

Despite the silliness spewing from the mouths of environmentalist hypocrites, the economic and security benefits of domestic oil and gas production are hard to deny. Thanks to advances in fracking technology, natural gas now sells for one-third of what it did in 2008. As a consequence, Americans are saving hundreds of dollars on their heating and electric bills annually — and that has to be good news for Mr. Gore.

Fracking is also propelling domestic oil production to its highest levels ever. In fact, the International Energy Agency recently announced that the United States has overtaken Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the world’s largest oil producer. With the unrest in the Middle East and Ukraine, our energy boom couldn’t have come at a better time.

Despite so much good news, naysayers like Tom Steyer, Al Gore, Robert Redford and George Soros are doing their best to condemn the fossil-fuel industry. Until they start taking their own advice, however, there’s no reason for anyone else to.

Drew Johnson is an editorial writer for The Washington Times.

II  The Global Warming Statistical Meltdown. The Numbers don’t add up!

Redacted from an article By JUDITH CURRY

Ms. Curry, a professor and former chairwoman of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, is the president of Climate Forecast Applications Network.

The Wall Street Journal

October 10, 2014

At the recent United Nations Climate Summit, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned that,  “Without significant cuts in emissions by all countries, and in key sectors, the window of opportunity to stay within less than 2 degrees [of warming] will soon close forever.” Actually, this window of opportunity may remain open for quite some time. A growing body of evidence suggests that the climate is less sensitive to increases in carbon-dioxide emissions than policy makers generally assume—and that the need for reductions in such emissions is less urgent.

In its most optimistic projections, which assume a substantial decline in emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that the “dangerous” level might never be reached. In its most extreme, pessimistic projections, which assume heavy use of coal and rapid population growth, the threshold could be exceeded as early as 2040. But these projections reflect the effects of rising emissions on temperatures simulated by climate models, which are being challenged by recent observations.

Human-caused warming depends not only on increases in greenhouse gases but also on how “sensitive” the climate is to these increases. Climate sensitivity is defined as the global surface warming that occurs when the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere doubles. If climate sensitivity is high, then we can expect substantial warming in the coming century as emissions continue to increase. If climate sensitivity is low, then future warming will be substantially lower, and it may be several generations before we reach what the UN considers a dangerous level, even with high emissions.

The IPCC’s latest report (published in 2013) concluded that the actual change in 70 years if carbon-dioxide concentrations double, called the transient climate response, is likely in the range of 1 to 2.5 degrees Celsius. Most climate models have transient climate response values exceeding 1.8 degrees Celsius. But the IPCC report notes the substantial discrepancy between recent observation-based estimates of climate sensitivity and estimates from climate models.

More than a dozen other observation-based studies have found climate sensitivity values lower than those determined using global climate models, including recent papers published in Environmentrics (2012),Nature Geoscience (2013) and Earth Systems Dynamics (2014). These new climate sensitivity estimates add to the growing evidence that climate models are running “too hot.” Moreover, the estimates in these empirical studies are being borne out by the much-discussed “pause” or “hiatus” in global warming—the period since 1998 during which global average surface temperatures have not significantly increased.

The sensitivity of the climate to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide is a central question in the debate on the appropriate policy response to increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Climate sensitivity and estimates of its uncertainty are key inputs into the economic models that drive cost-benefit analyses and estimates of the social cost of carbon.

Continuing to rely on climate-model warming projections based on high, model-derived values of climate sensitivity skews the cost-benefit analyses and estimates of the social cost of carbon. This can bias policy decisions. The implications of the lower values of climate sensitivity in our paper, as well as similar other recent studies, is that human-caused warming near the end of the 21st century should be less than the 2-degrees-Celsius “danger” level for all but the IPCC’s most extreme emission scenario.

This slower rate of warming—relative to climate model projections—means there is less urgency to phase out greenhouse gas emissions now, and more time to find ways to decarbonize the economy affordably. It also allows us the flexibility to revise our policies as further information becomes available.


Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com


Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

I From: FLAME   (Facts and Logic About the Middle East)

II Obama Dismembers American Military – By F. MICHAEL MALOOF

September 2014

Terrorist groups ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria), Hamas, al Qaeda and Boko Haram have in common their disdain for Western values, their murderous disregard for human life and their goals of conquering vast lands in the name of Islam. Because they consider jihad a divine mission, they refuse to surrender or negotiate peace.

What are the facts?

ISIS, the latest, most brutal and militarily successful Islamist terror group, grew as an offshoot of al Qaeda in Syria. The group now controls huge swaths of territory in Syria and Iraq, massive stores of armaments, some 15,000 soldiers and billions of dollars in assets. ISIS’s avowed goal is to create an Islamic caliphate—empire—consisting of land it perceives to belong to Islam, hundreds of other terrorist acts, killing thousands of innocent civilians. Boko Haram has distinguished itself by murdering some 5,000 citizens, including 2,000 in 2014 alone, kidnapping 300 Christian schoolgirls and driving 650,000 Nigerians from their homes.

Likewise, Hamas, a terrorist Palestinian splinter group of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, has killed hundreds of innocent Israelis through suicide bombs and launched more than 13,000 rockets aimed at Israeli civilians from Gaza. It has also abducted and murdered Israeli children. Since Hamas violently seized control of Gaza in 2007, it has ruled with an iron Islamist hand, imposing strict sharia religious law, crushing civil rights and driving Christian Arabs out by the thousands. Hamas’s charter states its goal is to conquer the entire Holy Land and kill all its Jews. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh has proclaimed that,  “We love death like our enemies love life.”  No wonder then, that the group readily sacrificed thousands of its own people by using them as human shields in its war on Israel.

Other Islamist terror groups, such as al Qaeda, with cells throughout the Middle East and Africa, and Boko Haram in Nigeria, use equally bloodthirsty tactics in their jihad to expel foreign influences from “Muslim lands” and create a worldwide caliphate. Al Qaeda, of course, engineered the 9/11 attacks, the 2005 London subway bombings and hundreds of other terrorist acts, killing thousands of innocent civilians. Boko Haram has distinguished itself by murdering some 5,000 citizens, including 2,000 in 2014 alone, kidnapping 300 Christian schoolgirls and driving 650,000 Nigerians from their homes.

What Can Be Done? Islamist terror groups are clearly ascendant, increasing their carnage and influence daily and increasingly threatening Middle Eastern nations, Western Europe, and the US Indeed, American Secretary of State Kerry called ISIS a force of “ugly, savage, inexplicable, nihilistic and valueless evil.” Likewise, British Prime Minister David Cameron has called Hamas’s intentional attacks on Israeli civilians “barbaric.” Comparable adjectives have been used to describe the ruthless and fanatical brutality of al Qaeda and Boko Haram.

While most of the world’s nations agree that the global Islamist jihad must be stopped, its perpetrators have implacably refused to surrender or negotiate a peace. All remain unconditionally committed to the defeat of Islam’s “infidel” enemies and colonizing their lands. Even Hamas in its recent conflict with Israel broke all 11 ceasefire agreements, rendering peace talks impossible and subjecting Palestinian citizens to more suffering.

While no Western nation seeks another war in the Middle East or Africa, we must ask how long these terrorist aggressors should be permitted to kill and expel civilian populations and conquer others’ territories. Indeed, since these groups show no signs of relenting their murderous terror campaigns, responsible Western nations, led by the United States, should consider urgent action for stopping them. While Israel is helping to fight Hamas—in fact is compelled to do so since Hamas attacks its citizens daily— Israel cannot hold back the jihadi tide by itself. It needs the unalloyed support of the West for its fight. But even more, the world needs Western nations to defeat the global jihad . . . before these terror groups swallow more territory, enslave more people and strike our homeland once again.

Global jihadi groups—ISIS, Hamas, al Qaeda and Boko Haram—share the same oppressive Islamist ideology, the same drive to conquer others’ lands and people, the same barbaric tactics and disrespect for human life, and they raise the same increasingly dire threat to the US and our allies. Isn’t it time for a U.S.-led coalition to oppose the black flag of jihad with moral determination, courage and all necessary force?

FLAME , P.O. Box 590359, San Francisco, CA 94159,Gerardo Joffe, President

II  Obama dismembers American Military

(As per tacit agreement with Vladimir Putin, the Chinese, the Iranians and the Islamists) jsk

From: Whistleblower Magazine published by World Net Daily (WND)

October 31, 2014

Redacted from an article by F. MICHAEL MALOOF

WASHINGTON – Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, recipient of the US military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor, as well as other top retired officers, say President Obama’s agenda is decimating the morale of the US ranks to the point members no longer feel prepared to fight or have the desire to win.

“There is no doubt he (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him” over such issues as “homosexuals, women in foxholes, the Obama sequester,” Brady told WND.

Not only are military service members being demoralized and the ranks’ overall readiness being reduced by the Obama administration’s purge of key leaders, colonels — those lined up in rank to replace outgoing generals — are quietly taking their careers in other directions.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, who was with Delta Force and later Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence under President George W. Bush, says it is worrying that four-star generals are being retired at the rate that has occurred under Obama.

Boykin points out that the military adheres to the constitutional requirement of a civilian leadership over the military. As a consequence, officers are not allowed to criticize their civilian leadership, as occurred when Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal was relieved in 2010 of his command of the International Security Assistance Force and commander of US Forces in Afghanistan. He was relieved due to what has been described as unflattering remarks made about Vice President Joe Biden and other administration officials in a Rolling Stone magazine article.

Boykin said the future of the military is becoming more and more of concern, since colonels who would be generals also are being relieved of duty, if they show that they’re not going to support Obama’s agenda, which critics have described as socialist. As a consequence, he said, the lower grades therefore have decided to leave, having been given the signal that there is no future in the military for them.

“These officers want to train for war but are not be allowed to” because of the preoccupation not only with sequestration, but what Boykin said were other concerns surfacing in the military under Obama as commander-in-chief.

He referred specifically to the recent repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which now allows openly homosexual personnel in the military. In addition, he said the integration of women into the infantry “will reduce readiness of units.” He also was critical of the rules of engagement which he says favor “political correctness over our ability to fight to win.”

WND reported that three of the nine firings by Obama this year alone were linked to the controversy surrounding the Sep. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the CIA special mission in Benghazi, Libya.

In one case, US Army Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded US African Command when the consulate was attacked and four Americans were killed, was highly critical of the decision by the State Department not to send in reinforcements.

Obama has insisted there were no reinforcements available that night. But Ham contends reinforcements could have been sent in time, and he said he never was given a stand-down order. However, others contend that he was given the order but defied it. He ultimately was relieved of his command and retired.

It is no accident that the president used the Obama sequester and shutdown to punish the military family,” he said. “It is part of his DNA. In fact it is in the psyche of the entire liberal/progressive establishment — the elite. President Clinton outed himself and this ilk when he declared his loathing of the military. Who could believe progressives/liberals care about veterans and military?”

Army Major Gen. Paul E. Vallely similarly has been very vocal in his opposition to the Obama administration. Vallely said the White House won’t investigate its own officials but finds it easy to fire military commanders “who have given their lives for their country.”

“Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama’s ideology,” Vallely said. “The White House protects their own. That’s why they stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and Obamacare. He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

F. Michael Maloof, staff writer for WND and G2 Bulletin, is a former senior security policy analyst in the office of the secretary of defense.

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

II  Pertinent  critique of Netanyahu’s speech by Americans for a Safe Israel.  (AFSI)

I  Redacted from Netanyahu’s speech, September 29, 2014. Complete video of speech shown below.

Distinguished delegates, I come here from Jerusalem to speak on behalf of my people, the people of Israel. I’ve come here to speak about the dangers we face and about the opportunities we seek. I’ve come here to expose the brazen lies spoken from this very podium against my country and against the brave soldiers who defend it.

Ladies and gentleman, the people of Israel pray for peace. But our hopes and the world’s hopes for peace are in danger because everywhere we look, militant Islam is on the march.

It’s not militants. It’s not Islam. It’s militant Islam. And typically, its first victims are other Muslims, but it spares no one. Christians, Jews, Yazidis, Kurds, no creed, no faith, no exit — no ethnic group is beyond its sights. And it’s rapidly spreading in every part of the world.

You know the famous American saying, “All politics is local”? For the militant Islamists, all politics is global because their ultimate goal is to dominate the world.

Now, that threat might seem exaggerated to some since it starts out small, like a cancer that attacks a particular part of the body. But left unchecked, the cancer grows, metastasizing over wider and wider areas. To protect the peace and security of the world, we must remove this cancer before it’s too late.

Last week, many of the countries represented here rightly applauded President Obama for leading the effort to confront ISIS. And yet weeks before, some of these same countries, same countries that now support confronting ISIS opposed Israel for confronting Hamas.

They evidently don’t understand that ISIS and Hamas are branches of the same poisonous tree. ISIS and Hamas share a fanatical creed, which they both seek to impose well beyond the territory under their control. Listen to ISIS self-declared caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

This is what he said two months ago. “A day will soon come when the Muslim will walk everywhere as a master. The Muslims will cause the world to hear and understand the meaning of terrorism and destroy the idol of democracy.”

Now listen to Khaled Mashal, the leader of Hamas. He proclaims a similar vision of the future. “We say this to the West: By Allah, you will be defeated. Tomorrow our nation will sit on the throne of the world.”

As Hamas’ charter makes clear, Hamas’ immediate goal is to destroy Israel, but Hamas has a broader objective. They also want a caliphate. Hamas shares the global ambitions of its fellow militant Islamists, and that’s why its supporters wildly cheered in the streets of Gaza as thousands of Americans were murdered in 9/11.

And that’s why its leaders condemned the United States for killing Osama bin Laden, whom they praised as a holy warrior. So when it comes to their ultimate goals, Hamas is ISIS, and ISIS is Hamas. And what they share in common, all militant Islamists share in common.

Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Shabaab in Somalia, Hezbollah in Lebanon, al Nusra in Syria, the Mahdi Army in Iraq, and the Al Qaida branches in Yemen, Libya, the Philippines, India and elsewhere. Some are radical Sunnis. Some are radical Shiites. Some want to restore a pre-Medieval caliphate from the seventh century. Others want to trigger the apocalyptic return of an Imam from the ninth century.

They operate in different lands. They target different victims. And they even kill each other in their battle for supremacy, but they all share a fanatic ideology. They all seek to create ever-expanding enclaves of militant Islam where there is no freedom and no tolerance; where women are treated as cattle; Christians are decimated; and minorities are subjugated, sometimes given the stark choice: convert or die. For them, anyone can be considered an infidel, including fellow Muslims.

There’s one place where that could soon happen: the Islamic State of Iran. For 35 years, Iran has relentlessly pursued the global mission, which was set forth by its founding ruler, Ayatollah Khomeini, in these words, ”We will export our revolution to the entire world until the cry, “There is no god but Allah will echo throughout the world over.”

So don’t be fooled by Iran’s manipulative charm offensive. It’s designed for one purpose and for one purpose, only, to lift the sanctions and remove the obstacles to Iran’s path to the bomb.

Allowing that to happen would pose the gravest threat to us all. It’s one thing to confront militant Islamists on pickup trucks armed with Kalashnikov rifles. It’s another thing to confront militant Islamists armed with weapons of mass destruction.

Ladies and gentlemen, would you let ISIS enrich uranium? Would you let ISIS build a heavy-water reactor? Would you let ISIS develop inter-continental ballistic missiles. Of course you wouldn’t. Then you mustn’t let the Islamic State of Iran do those things either, because here’s what’ll happen.

To defeat ISIS and leave Iran as a threshold nuclear power is to win the battle and lose the war. Ladies and gentlemen, the fight against militant Islam is indivisible. When militant Islam succeeds anywhere, it’s emboldened everywhere. When it suffers a blow in one place, it’s set back in every place.

That’s why Israel’s fight against Hamas is not just our fight, it’s your fight. Israel is fighting a fanaticism today that your countries may be forced to fight tomorrow.

Ladies and gentlemen, we live in a world steeped in tyranny and terror, where gays are hanged from cranes in Tehran, political prisoners are executed in Gaza, young girls abducted en masse in Nigeria, and hundreds of thousands are butchered in Syria, Libya, and Iraq.

Yet nearly half, nearly half, of the UN Human Rights Council’s resolutions focusing on a single country have been directed against Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East. Israel, where issues are openly debated in a boisterous parliament, where human rights are protected by the — by independent courts and where women, gays and minorities live in a genuinely free society.

In the past, outrageous lies against the Jews were the precursors to the wholesale slaughter of our people. But no more. Today, we, the Jewish people, have the power to defend ourselves. We will defend ourselves against our enemies on the battlefield. We will expose their lies against us in the court of public opinion. Israel will continue to stand proud and unbowed.

Ladies and gentlemen, despite the enormous challenges facing Israel, I believe we have a historic opportunity. After decades of seeing Israel as their enemy, leading states in the Arab world increasingly recognize that together, we and they face many of the same dangers. And principally, this means a nuclear-armed Iran and militant Islamist movements gaining ground in the Sunni world.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is a new Middle East. It presents new dangers, but also new opportunities. Israel is prepared to work with Arab partners and the international community to confront those dangers and to seize those opportunities. Together, we must recognize the global threat of militant Islam, the primacy of dismantling Iran’s nuclear weapons capability, and the indispensable role of Arab states in advancing peace with the Palestinians.

Ladies and gentlemen, let us light a torch of truth and justice to safeguard our common future. Thank you.

II Critique of speech by Americans for Safe Israel.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke at the United Nations with the intention of exposing the many lies against Israel spoken by Mahmoud Abbas in his attack against the Jewish State at the United Nations last Friday. He described these lies, which don’t deserve repeating, as the function of diseased minds whose hatred of Jews has no bounds. PM Netanyahu stressed that we are NOT occupiers in our own country, citing history, archaeology, and common sense as his source. He did not mention our biblical and legal entitlements. In our opinion, this was a serious omission. Recognizing that Israel’s withdrawals from Lebanon and Gaza created “threats from militant Islamists,” (he never mentioned the hardships endured by the Israelis evacuated from their homes and communities in Gush Katif/Gaza) , he insisted that, “rock solid security arrangements” would be required for further “territorial compromises” that would be necessary for “peace.”

We understand that PM Netanyahu has to walk a fine line in the diplomatic world in order to present the case for Israel; however WE STRONGLY DISAGREE with his willingness to give away more Israeli land and we know, as does any realist, that there are NO SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS THAT COULD GUARANTEE SAFETY FOR ISRAELIS. If he had cited Israel’s biblical entitlement to the land, that might have been the end of the lesson. If he used the Edmond Levy report to demonstrate Israel’s legal entitlement to the land, that might have been a good post script to the lesson. But agreeing that  any peace that requires territorial compromise is a prescription for disaster for Israel.

As we enter this new year of 5775 we pray that Israel’s Prime Minister will remember the meaning of the “promised land” given to our ancestors, which centuries of dedicated Jews have sacrificed to ensure. We must continue in that tradition, treasuring the land and its protectors.

(I hope the PM reads the AFSI critique above. It points out omissions that constantly pervade Netanyahu’s usual truly magnificent delivery and the perverse thinking of virtually all the previous leaders of Israel. They have not a clue as to how they have allowed the Arabs to invent and direct the entire narrative putting the Israelis on the defensive when every historical and political fact is on the side of the Jews. Only the Jews could find a way to invariably snatch defeat from the jaws of glorious, deserved victory leaving their few friends in the world confused by their stupidity and propensity to self-destruct trying to please their enemies! It is very much like a Patty Hearst Syndrome — only this time by an entire nation, an entire misguided people.)

This evening (Oct 2, 2014) former US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, on the Greta Van Susteren TV show, could not understand why  Israel had not taken the Iran nuclear facility out of existence five years ago. It would have saved the world most of our current problems with militant Islam.  The US and the European Union have failed to distinguish its friends from its enemies and what happens next, especially with the current deliberately destructive occupant in the White House, can only fill one with great foreboding. And, may Hashem help us.

Jerome S. Kaufman

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

PM Netanyahu, with his usual brilliance,  addresses UN Sep 29, 2014:

 

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

By Jerome S. Kaufman

September 28, 2014

While watching the fantastic video featuring Melanie Phillips (See below), I heard her use an amazingly acute descriptive term. Her term was Left Wing Narcissism and it must  have been coined by Ms. Phillips who also coined the defining term, Londonistan, so precisely describing the Muslim take-over of London.

I guess the reason the term, Left Wing Narcissism rings such a bell with me is that it finally gives me a defining term to describe and understand many people including some in my own family. The term implies the condition wherein the facts have no bearing on thought or action. They just get in the way of engraved-in-concrete generalizations with which certain individuals are seemingly born. Intelligent discussion, respected literature, history or events that have followed subsequent to their birth evidently  have made no impression.

Under this aberration, there is, of course, no such thing as right or wrong. Everything is open to challenge and dubious question and finally,  it is concluded, simply revolves around one’s own innate irrefutable reaction and personal conclusion. So, no differentiation or judgement calls or beliefs need be  determined. It is all equivocal.

There is  still another buzz word utilized — “moral equivalency” for all conditions and situations. There are, of course, no real criminals or bad guys — just those poor folks that have been environmentally challenged with no real control over the understandable results.

Typically these individuals with Left Wing Narcissism also know, without any question of contradiction, that, “I am a nice person. I am not religious but I am ‘spiritual.’” And … please don’t get hung up trying to define exactly what those statements mean.

Naturally, everyone else who does not believe in these unintelligible generalizations is demonized as being inferior, racist, bigoted, chauvinistic, nationalistic, narrow, unsophisticated, uneducated, plain country, right wing extremists or just despicable Republicans.

Apparently even some “decent people” are perverted because they watch the right wing fanaticism of TV Fox News. The rest of us are smart enough to turn away from Fox like the plague. It is so unsettling. The only truly worthwhile TV station is, of course, MNBC featuring stars like Rachel Maddow of the perpetual snarled mouth; Christiane Amanpour who would obviously be more comfortable if she had stayed in Iran where she was born and where her soul still abides; Chris Mathews, who one wonders if he still gets shivers up his leg when the archetypical narcissist Barack Obama postures and nonchalantly tells limitless outright lies. Amazingly Obama himself has never progressed beyond his role as the consummate community organizer. He remains simply another politician, another Party hack devoid of moral confusion.

Then, finally there was Keith Olbermann who made one sick with his single minded hatred of anything Conservative or Republican. Fortunately for the viewing audience, he is now just an arrogant, abrasive sports commentator easily cancelled out as quickly as his obnoxious face hits the screen.

There are, of course, tons of other examples but I really just wanted to introduce you to this precise descriptive term, It may be of some help to you in your own friendly family conversations. But, I doubt it. So just keep the peace and debate the weather, the traffic, the price of gasoline, who won the ball game.  Discuss your other obnoxious relatives and when do we eat?

Thanks again to the incomparable Melanie Phillips.

Jerome S. Kaufman, Publisher/Editor Israel Commentator

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Melanie Phillips’ video where the term originated as far as I know?

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read More About:

Share This Post

On the Origin of ISIS

Why has a terrorist state blossomed in Syria and Iraq?

Redacted from an article BY HUSSAIN ABDUL-HUSSAIN AND LEE SMITH

The Weekly Standard, Sep 8, 2014

The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the terrorist army many thousand strong now rampaging through the Levant, embraces such an extreme, violent ideology that it makes even al Qaeda squeamish, argue many Western experts. On this reading, al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri was forced to distance himself from ISIS’s bloody practices. In reality, the notion that ISIS’s gory campaign turns the stomach even of an arch-terrorist, America’s public enemy number one, is colorful but inaccurate.

To be sure, ISIS—or the Islamic State, as it now calls itself—is an extremist movement, attracting militants from all over the world eager to help build the new caliphate. Given the thousands of foreigners—including Chechen snipers, Saudi car bombers, and Western misfits like American Douglas McAuthur McCain—who have signed on to fight alongside ISIS, security officials are right to fear that the United States will become an ISIS target. The group kidnaps and murders American journalists. It threatened the existence of the Yazidi community in Iraq, and it slaughtered at least 700 members of the Sheitat, a tribe in Syria, last month. It regularly employs the vicious hudud punishments to enforce sharia law in the areas it controls in Syria and Iraq.

None of this, however, is outside the norms of a region where governments regularly incite hatred of America and Israel, wage wars against their own populations, and kidnap, imprison, and kill foreign nationals. Cutting off the hands of criminals, as prescribed by sharia, is hardly out of the ordinary; the Islamic Republic of Iran hangs gay teenagers from construction cranes, and the legal authorities of Saudi Arabia—an American ally—regularly separate accused criminals from their heads in public executions in what is popularly known as Chop-Chop Square.

Nor are ISIS’s money-raising schemes especially novel in the Middle East. As the Wall Street Journal reported last week, the organization’s key source of income is (stolen) oil, especially in the Syrian provinces of Deir al-Zour and Raqqa and the Iraqi province of Nineveh. “They sell it to opposition groups, to the tribes, back to the Syrian regime, or on the Iraqi black market,” says Faysal Itani, an ISIS expert at the Atlantic Council. The other main source of revenue is taxation, or rather, extortion. As one source in the city of Raqqa, ISIS’s so-called capital, explained to us, merchants pay 3,000 Syrian pounds (close to $20) every two months. The kidnapping of foreigners or wealthy Syrians for ransom also brings in millions.

And yet it’s true that ISIS is not exactly what we’ve become accustomed to seeing in the Middle East of late. “This is not a classic insurgency,” says Itani, “or a non-state actor.  Rather, it’s a state-building organization.” ISIS’s effort right now is to secure borders and lines of communication.

ISIS’s leader, Ibrahim Awwad al-Badri, is the self-proclaimed caliph, also known as Abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi, a 43-year-old jihadist from the Iraqi city of Samarra.  His strategy has been greatly facilitated by the Obama administration’s December 2011 withdrawal from Iraq and the anti-Sunni policies pursued by the Shiite-dominated government in Baghdad. ISIS’s project was further aided by the Syrian uprising, which began in March 2011. Over the last three and half years, it has evolved into a civil war in which Syrian president Bashar al-Assad has slaughtered Sunnis. The White House and the rest of the international community have done nothing to stop him.

In other words, any policy addressing ISIS also has to address the root problem: What gave ISIS room to take hold and blossom is the Iranian-backed order of the Levant, consisting of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and Nuri al-Maliki and his successor, Haidar al Abadi, in Iraq. All these are sustained by the Shiite Islamic revolutionary regime in Tehran. And the White House has virtually signed onto this regional security apparatus. It is the tacit agreement the Obama administration has made with Tehran that has not only galvanized ISIS but also made foes out of former allies. Sunni Arab tribes that sided with the United States during the surge to defeat Al Qaeda in Iraq less than a decade ago are now joining the Sunni extremists of ISIS.

The other key players in the ISIS-led Sunni rebellion are the Arab tribes on both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border. Indeed, the map of ISIS’s new caliphate, with its so-called capital in Raqqa and encompassing Deir al-Zour in Syria and Nineveh, Anbar, Salaheddine, and Diyala in Iraq, overlays a much older map of tribal lands forming a contiguous territory with a total area of around 168,000 square miles, bigger than Great Britain (143,000 square miles). To see how ISIS has succeeded, it is of paramount importance to understand the tribal politics behind its achievement.

Last week President Obama announced that the White House has no policy to deal with ISIS. The revelation came as no surprise since it was the administration’s handling of Iraq and Syria that gave ISIS room to grow.

… But the reality is that Obama doesn’t want to change the equation. As the president has explained in a series of interviews over the last year, he wants to build a new geopolitical equilibrium that would bring Iran back into the community of nations. And to do that, the White House has to respect Iranian regional interests—which amounts to signing off on Iranian hegemony across the Levant, at the expense of America’s traditional regional partners, the Sunnis. (And, by the way — the sacrifice of Israel allowing Iran to build nuclear bombs, which is virtually a fait accompli) jsk

Lee Smith is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard. Hussain Abdul-Hussain is the Washington bureau chief of the Kuwaiti newspaper Alrai.

(PS  Just today, Tuesday Sep 23, 2014, the US cobbled together some sort of bizarre coalition including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Anti-Assad Syrian forces, possibly some Turkish involvement as they are pushed into the conflict by thousands of Kurdish refugees fleeing Iraq. This conglomerate is supposed to be attacking ISIS in both Syria and Iraq to degrade it only, with no discussion as to the only real solution —  wiping it off the map.  There are supposedly to be no  American boots on the ground except for advisors? (A necessary gross lie)

The only thing good about it seems to be that Russia does not like it.  Its staunch ally and client state Syria  is being invaded  and its relationship with Iran becomes conflicted.  Syrian President Assad has mixed emotions. It is OK with him so long as his internal enemies are killed and his dictatorship is preserved.  Ultimately  the centuries-old primal forces of tribal and religious enmity will not go away.

The strength of ISIS may be diminished for the moment but what else comes of this action and this bizarre bunch of supposed allies is very much in question. The thought of sacrificing more American lives here makes me sick. I would love the Arabs and the Turks to duke it out themselves.  There are only two US allies in the area in which I have any faith – Israel, of course and our long neglected legitimate friends, the Kurds.)  jsk 

Subscribe: israel-commentary-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/schmice

Twitter: @israelcomment

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments