Glenn Beck, Jon Voight and Rev. John Hagee in video visiting Israel

WALKING BEHIND THE ‘PILLARS OF FIRE’ WITH GLENN BECK
Redacted from article By Helen Freedman

II Video with Reverend John Hagee at the Glenn Beck event in Israel
(view below)

I The inspirational gatherings that were part of the Glenn Beck mission to Israel occurred against a very grim backdrop. It was ironic that the subject of ‘Restoring Courage’, the theme of Glenn Beck’s mission in Israel, was so starkly presented by the events that unfolded as I arrived in Israel on Thursday afternoon, August 18.

A series of terror attacks on buses and private cars had just occurred on the road from Be’er Sheva to Eilat that left many Israeli civilians and soldiers dead and wounded. Israel “retaliated,” followed by Kassam rockets and Grads falling all over Israel’s south.

Again, the Israeli government “retaliated.” Israel also apologized to the Egyptians for shooting back at terrorists dressed in Egyptian soldier uniforms. As of this writing, the Egyptians are violating the peace agreement with Israel as they proceed with the demilitarization of the Sinai, bringing forces and weapons into the area, (with the permission of Israel Defense Minister Ehud Barak and PM Netanyahu. Can you believe that? – Jsk),

How long will it be before these same Egyptian troops march on Israel? What will Israel’s response be if that happens? Will Israel’s leaders have the courage to protect Israel’s citizens?

Glenn Beck would answer these questions by urging Israel’s leaders not to fear world condemnation – to use the shields of courage and truth to banish fear – and not follow the path to surrender. He would encourage Israel to follow G-d’s ‘Pillars of Fire’ to which he referred in his powerful address at the DavidsonCenter outside the southern wall of the Old City in Jerusalem on Wednesday afternoon, August 24.

John Voight, who had joined us on Sunday night, was greeted enthusiastically by the crowd. He spoke of the new type of holocaust, where terror is used for political ends. Beck confirmed this by declaring, “If you stare evil in the eye, it backs down; it is a coward!” Beck declared, “This will be the generation that will say “Never Again” to the repeated holocausts against the Jews.

Beck charged everyone with the Responsibility to alter the course of history by being willing to speak the truth. When the “human rights” organizations exercise their double standard, we must declare, “Not in My Name!!” He called for truth seekers to link arms with him – to stand with courage – and to walk behind G-d’s ‘Pillars of Fire’ – to choose life – with no more lies.

The dynamic gathering was closed by Beck asking us to remember – and to teach these lessons to our children – and to obey G-d’s word. When we are asked, “Where were you when the world was on the edge again, when the West, Israel and the Jews were blamed again, we can say that “We stood with Israel.”

II Video with Reverend John Hagee and Glenn Beck

Maybe you forgot who’s Al Sharpton?

MSNBC Gives a Violent Racist a TV Show
FrontPage Magazine
Posted by Daniel Greenfield
Aug 18th, 2011

Imagine if MSNBC gave a TV show to a violent racist who led angry mobs against Jewish and Asian communities and businesses – Mobs that gathered outside a Jewish synagogue chanting “Heil Hitler” and “Death to the Jews.”

Unimaginable, right? Wrong. After years of accusing FOX News of racism, MSNBC gave a violent racist his own show. Of course MSNBC would never give a white racist like David Duke his own show. But they have no problem giving one to Al Sharpton.

Sharpton is many things—a cunning gutter clown, a hate-filled agitator and a savvy trader in political favors. Those qualities have taken him from street riots to a kingmaker role in the Democratic Party to the White House, where he has become its link to the black community.

Sharpton has eclipsed Jesse Jackson as the national agitator with the highest profile, adopting Jackson’s old role of middleman between the Democratic Party and the black community, and his business model of blackmailing corporations with boycott threats to fund his organization. The National Action Network, Sharpton’s organization, commands appearances by Obama and Biden, and true to his usual financial dealings remains deep in debt while paying him a six figure salary.

But there can be no talk of Sharpton without discussing the trail of debris behind him. Yankel Rosenbaum, the University of Melbourne student, stabbed and beaten to death on President Street among the stately manors of what was once known as Doctor’s Row, was the most famous victim of Sharpton’s Crown Height Pogrom, but not the only one.

There was Anthony Graziosi, a white, bearded Italian electronics salesman wearing a dark suit, who was mistaken for a Jew, and died for it. Bracha Estrin, a Holocaust survivor, who saw the mobs chanting “Heil Hitler” and “Death to the Jews” and believing that history was about to repeat itself, jumped rather than fall into their hands.Twenty years ago this August, a line of bodies was lowered into the ground. And Sharpton walked away with a higher national profile than ever.

Three years later, another round of racist protests at Freddy’s Fashion Mart with protesters screaming, “Burn down this Jew store!” led to an attack that killed seven minority employees. The Freddy’s protests were led by Morris Powell, head of the Buy Black Committee at Sharpton’s National Action Network. Powell had been previously put on trial for breaking the head of a Korean woman during one of his pickets.

Sharpton’s modus operandi was to create chaos, and then represent himself as the man who could stop it. The uglier the confrontations got, the more people died, the more credibility he gained. In 2001, he went from terrorizing entire neighborhoods to claiming control over the outcome of the mayoral election. Shortly thereafter the New York State Democratic Party made it clear that attacks on Sharpton were no longer acceptable. Senate candidates were expected to court the hate monger and did.

And then it was presidential candidates. Sharpton’s presidential run utilized the same tactics at the national level that had worked for him at the city and state level. He wasn’t out to win, just to cause enough chaos and uncertainty that the party would buy him off. And it worked.

It was a surprisingly short journey from a racist agitator who intimidated city authorities, to a state leader who intimidated the New York State Democratic Party, to a national leader who intimidated the entire Democratic Party.

Less than 10 years after the Freddy’s fire, Sharpton was addressing a national audience from the stage of the Democratic National Convention. Twenty years after the Crown Heights Pogrom, he is Obama’s unofficial outreach man to the black community and on the verge of getting his own full-time MSNBC show. A long career of bigotry, blood on his hands and a video of him discussing a drug deal are not a barrier.

Sharpton cuts a ridiculous figure at MSNBC. It isn’t every man who can make Ed Schultz look like a class act, but Sharpton manages that. His on air flubs have gone viral and what’s worse is that when he isn’t stumbling over words, he has nothing to say.

MSNBC got rid of Olbermann, but replaced him with an even bigger diva with a long history of racist blackmail. Sharpton is more controversial than Olbermann, but far less articulate. If Olbermann was trying to be Cronkite in drag, Sharpton doesn’t know what to do without a microphone and a mob. Sharpton’s name has attracted attention, where Cenk Uygur’s only brought bafflement, and as a reliable Obama toady he won’t cause any grief for the White House.

But the MSNBC gig exposes what a hollow man the Reverend Al is. He is the son of a Cadillac driving slumlord and a spectacularly implausible choice as a civil rights leader. His ridiculous hairstyle, jumpsuits and jewelry, and his over the top delivery were the tricks of a carnival showman.

The MSNBC gig allows Sharpton to deliver White House talking points to a national audience, but what happens in 2013 without a Democratic administration in need of messaging? Sharpton has gotten this far by presenting himself as the intermediary between the Ivy League liberal and the black street. In Obama’s words, “the voice of the voiceless.”

But what happens if the turnout isn’t there? Sharpton has been able to drive racist mobs to target defenseless minorities, but if he can’t drive voters to the polls, then he will suddenly be much less useful to MSNBC and the party it serves. The future of the “limousine racist” is closely tied to black turnout in 2012. And if he doesn’t deliver, Sharpton will be back screaming at hate filled crowds in Brooklyn. Back to the minor leagues of the party of hate.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.

And. let us not forget Sharpton history as related in a recent Jewish Press article redacted below:

THE SCHNEIER/SHARPTON SHOW
By Jewish Press Editorial Board
Aug 24 2011

… The idea of Al Sharpton sitting around a table soberly discussing relations between blacks and Jews borders on the bizarre. Who can forget that in Crown Heights it was Rev. Sharpton who loudly harangued blacks and encouraged a racial interpretation of the death of 7-year old Gavin Cato?

… Rev. Sharpton at the time also talked about “apartheid” in Crown Heights and challenged local Jews, whom he referred to as “diamond merchants,” to “pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house” if they wanted to duke it out.

… Of course, no recap of Rev. Sharpton’s career would be complete without mention of the ugly controversy that gave him his first taste of notoriety – the Tawana Brawley hoax.

As John Perazzo summed it up for FrontPageMag.com in a 2007 article,

… [Sharpton] injected himself into the case of 16-year-old Tawana Brawley, who in November 1987 claimed that she had been repeatedly raped [and brutalized] for four days by six white kidnappers, at least one of whom was wearing a police badge . It was among the most disturbing tales in living memory.

Al Sharpton quickly assumed the role of special adviser to Miss Brawley and thereafter worked closely with the girl’s attorneys, C. Vernon Mason (who, later in his career, would be convicted of 66 counts of professional misconduct and disbarred from the legal profession) and Alton Maddox (who has publicly expressed his profound hatred for white people).

Sharpton and the Brawley lawyers demanded that New York Governor Mario Cuomo appoint a special prosecutor to the case and publicly charged that “high-level” local law enforcement officials were involved in the crime – an allegation that led to numerous death threats against members of the Dutchess County police department.

In the autumn of 1988, after conducting an exhaustive review of the facts, a grand jury released its report showing beyond any doubt that the entire Tawana Brawley story had been fabricated, and that at least $1 million of New York taxpayers’ money had been spent to investigate a colossal hoax.

Rev. Sharpton, some twenty tears later, still denies his negative role in Crown Heights and also maintains that he made no substantive mistakes. All he will express is remorse for perhaps having used language that “at times has been over the line.”

(The current question is rather: When is MSNBC “over the line”?) jsk

Bristol Palin’s, “Not Afraid of Life”

BOOK REVIEW by Doug Wead

Not Afraid of Life: My Journey So Far
By Bristol Palin
William Morrow, 272 pages

Bristol Palin’s new book, “Not Afraid of Life,” opens at 100 mph and never slows down. Everything the title promises is is an intimathere. This is the insider, unabashed account of life in the Palin family. This is a teenager’s almost innocent portrayal of her sudden rise to fame and the people she encounters along the way.

There are plenty of rough edges that can be used to justify the feelings of fans or foes alike, which adds to the surprise and frankness of this story. It keeps you turning the pages. And it keep you believing the narrative. Who would ever make this stuff up? And for what possible purpose?

Bristol begins with a chilling account of what can only be defined as date rape, although she is careful not to make that accusation. It is a cautionary tale of deceiving her mother, joining a rowdy group of friends for a camping trip, getting drunk and waking up to learn that she has lost her virginity. This unexpected opening signals the reader that what they think they know about the Palins is far less interesting than the truth they are about to hear. There is more to the story, and Bristol Palin is not afraid to tell it.

Some things happen as expected. Sarah Palin, the governor and vice-presidential nominee and Bristol’s mother, comes through looking pristine in this account. There is no “Mommie Dearest” going on here, no Patti Davis working out her issues with mother Nancy Reagan, saying to readers openly what couldn’t be said face to face in private. The father lives up to his public portrayal as a solid, silent man of strength. But while Bristol clearly loves her family and makes Wasilla, Alaska, sound like a spot of Norman Rockwell wonder, she is disarmingly honest about the snobs she encounters on the trail to stardom.

The McCains come off looking positively Brahmin, self-centered and arrogant. All the more so because Bristol isn’t trying too hard. Meghan McCain, daughter of Republican presidential nominee John McCain, seems panicky at the thought of any competition. Even Bristol’s existence seems threatening. Cindy McCain comes off as fake. And the McCain political handlers make Karl Rove look, well, kind of sweet. If nothing else, good Republicans will come away from Bristol’s book less wounded by the election of Barack Obama and the collapse of the American economy.

Bristol Palin is the real heroine of this tale, and not because she promotes herself. Indeed, if she did, it wouldn’t work. One wonders if Nancy French, her co-writer, helped offer that perspective. It is often what she doesn’t say, the absence of bitterness or playing the blame game that makes her a likable storyteller. She is so vulnerable, so quick to assume responsibility for her own actions that the reader will find it hard not to start rooting her on.

Bristol Palin’s baby, Tripp, and her faith and family are interweaving threads throughout the story. Although the relationship arguably began with a rape, Bristol never considers abortion, just as her mother rejected abortion and gave birth to a Down syndrome baby and poured out her love on the child. The names are even mimicked. Trigg is Sarah Palin’s “special” baby, Tripp is Bristol’s. And behind it all is their faith, which is an endless source of strength for them in the middle of their trial by a liberal media.

One gets a sense of that trial, too. How hated the Palins are. What it is like inside the tornado. Peaceful, actually. The winds raging all around them. To be sure, the national media is unforgiving. For one frightening, terrifying week, Sarah Palin posed a threat to their historical narrative of electing an urbane African-American as president. For having perpetrated that scare upon the noble elect, this family will be hounded to the grave.

Much of Bristol’s disillusionment is reserved for Hollywood, which in this case might be defined as any geographical place outside of Wasilla. Even Arizona is close to Hollywood, when you live in Alaska. Here she details the story of her rise to television fame as a contestant on “Dancing With the Stars.”

The thing she learns in Hollywood is that people are insincere. They are manipulative. They say and do things for selfish reasons. The world is so, well, so “unwasillafied,” that this poor teenager is appalled.

Aren’t there any real Christians here? By this time, you are drawn in by her innocence and asking yourself the same questions. Why are people so bad outside of Wasilla? Who would ever want to leave?

Forget “Dancing With the Stars.” Hey, forget a New York Times best-selling book, for that matter. And then you remember: the lie to mom, the camping trip with the rowdy friends and the alcohol and the sexual assault in the night. That was Wasilla too, not Hollywood. All of the media pain brought with it glory and millions of fans. And Bristol somehow figures that out and concludes she is “Not Afraid of Life.” Go, girl.

• Doug Wead is a New York Times best-selling author and former adviser to two presidents.

Don’t underestimate Obama. He is right on his own dedicated track

(After you complete this short article, please click to a complete analysis of the motivation of Barack Obama published in Israel Commentary, March 25, 2011) jsk

Click: Barack Obama

Disastrous policies are intentional steps on road to socialism

By Rep. Dan Burton

The Washington Times, August 8, 2011

It is a cardinal mistake in any competition, be it sports or politics – and politics is a competition of ideas – to underestimate your opponent. All too often, underestimating your opponent leads to disaster. I believe that America, especially America’s political class, is vastly underestimating President Obama; and if we continue to do so, it will be a disaster for America. Specifically, I am worried about the growing political story line that the Obama administration is “failing” because they are just inexperienced and the president is simply “in over his head.”

It is true that Mr. Obama never held an executive position in his life prior to being elected to the presidency. It is true that Mr. Obama had only three years (2005-2008) in the U.S. Senate prior to going to the White House, and it is true that Mr. Obama had just seven years of experience (1997-2004) in the Illinois state Senate – where he cast more than 130 “present” votes rather than go on the record on contentious issues. However, we should be under no illusion that the president’s lack of leadership experience means he is “in over his head” or that he does not know what he is doing.

Mr. Obama knows precisely what he is doing: He is changing America into his vision of a European-style socialist utopia where the government controls every aspect of our lives.

Consider the facts, since taking office, Mr. Obama has taken control of the student loan industry, the health care industry, the banking and financial sectors, and he orchestrated the bankruptcy and reorganization of two-thirds of the American automotive industry, leaving his political allies in the labor movement in effective control of the companies and allowing the administration to dictate the industry’s direction.

Although Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi could not strong-arm enough Democrats to pass legislation to allow the president to take control of our energy sector, the Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency is aggressively rewriting and reinterpreting environmental regulations to accomplish the same end result: government control of energy.

The pattern is unmistakable: Every solution proposed by the Obama administration to every problem is more government control. That is the textbook definition of socialism: “Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary).

Putting aside the fact that socialism is absolutely incompatible with the philosophy that made America a world superpower – limited government, light regulations, low taxes and maximum labor-market flexibility – the problem with socialism, as Margaret Thatcher famously said, is “that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” If you don’t believe this statement is true, how do you explain the sovereign debt crisis threatening to destroy the European Union?

While America’s debt crisis cannot be laid entirely at the feet of Mr. Obama, the fact is that in pursuit of his socialist agenda, he has accelerated the crisis with his reckless spending. The federal budget deficit in 2008, the last year before Mr. Obama took office, was $458.6 billion. The projected deficit for 2011 is $1.5 trillion – 323 percent higher than the nation’s deficit in the last year before President Obama took office. The president’s budget request for fiscal 2012 would lead us to the highest-ever budget deficit, roughly $1.6 trillion.

It is not yet too late to save America from financial ruin nor is it too late to save the American way of life. But to confront these threats, we must confront reality and that means we must stop viewing the president’s policies as the innocent missteps of a man who is “in over his head.” The president is not in over his head; he knows precisely what he is doing: rushing America down the path toward socialism.

Rep. Dan Burton is a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Indiana.

The Associated Press’s distorted terminology

Aided and abetted by the Detroit Free Press

By Jerome S. Kaufman

The Associated Press’s distorted terminology

The Detroit Free Press of August 19, 2011, page 13A, captioned an article, Gun men cross Egyptian Desert, kill 8 in Israel.

It turned out the Free Press simply followed the terminology of the article created by Associated Press (AP) correspondent, Daniella Cheslow. But, they could have done a whole lot better than the charade of Associated Press terminology. In the article the AP used the term “gunmen” six times and another inappropriate term, “militants” an additional four times, but what was the article all about? Gunmen?

It so happens “gunman” in the dictionary, defines “gunman” as
1. A man who is armed with a gun, especially, unlawfully
2. A man who is skilled with a gun

In popular parlance, one frequently refers to a gun man as someone committing a robbery.

The Associated Press article then went on to describe what these particular “gun men” had done:

They illegally penetrated Israel’s border with Egypt and launched an attack against innocent Israeli civilians killing 7 people with the actual intent to kill as many as possible.

The “gunmen” carefully planned an attack against a civilian bus that was on the way to Eilat, a tourist town in southern Israel. No robbery was attempted nor in the plans – only the blatant killing of innocents.

The “gunmen” set up an extensive ambush along a 300 yard strip of the bus’s route. They were armed with automatic weapons, grenades and suicide bomb belts. They also rigged a roadside bomb under a parked Jeep.

How is it that the obviously more pertinent and accurate term “terrorists” or more precisely Palestinian Terrorists, never entered the terminology of this article? Is the Associated Press (and the Detroit Free Press) really that anti-Israel that they refuse to tell the world exactly what Israelis have been up against every moment of their lives – ever since the re-birth of the Jewish nation in 1948? Unfortunately, these Palestinian TERRORIST acts are nothing new.

Furthermore, the extent of the terrorism has never had any correlation with how many Jews lived in Israel or how much land they have regained of the G-d given land that was supposed to have been theirs, in the first place.

Of additional interest, in the very last paragraph of the article, was a quote from Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, no friend of Israel or the Jews since she took off her hat as the Senator for New York State.

Secretary Clinton condemned what she called, “pre-meditated acts of terrorism against innocent civilians,” an obvious truism that, for some inexcusable reason, had evidently not occurred to the Associated Press or the Detroit Free Press.

So much for what the naive innocently consider objective news reporting.

Jerome S. Kaufman, Editor, Israel Commentary

Israel Bashers note: Israel Defense Forces training US Marines

Israel Bashers note: Israel Defense Forces training US Marines

Company of U.S. Marines comes to Israel for month of intensive training with IDF at Urban Warfare Training Center

Author: Rotem Eliav – IDF

August 14, 2011

The narrow streets and tall cement buildings of the world-renowned IDF Urban Warfare Training Center echoed with shouts in flawless English last week as U.S. Marine Corps soldiers delved into another close-quarters-battle drill. As part of the cooperation between IDF ground forces and the U.S. Marine Corps force stationed in Europe, a company of U.S. Marines came to Israel for a month of intensive training alongside IDF soldiers at IDF facilities. Dividing their time between the Adam Base in central Israel and the Tze’elim Base in the south, the soldiers trained in urban warfare, reconnaissance and target shooting.

As they embarked on a training exercise at the UWTC, Platoon Sgt. Robert Hattenbach explained, “We’ve never been to a mock town like that of the IDF.” He noted the facility’s size and unique structure. “It’s important for our soldiers to train in different sites, preparing them for anything,” he said. The Marines were thrilled to train at the city, raving about its realistic feel.

A smoke grenade hit the floor, rapidly secreting thick smoke of a vibrant color used for camouflage against the lurking enemy. Yelling out commands, M4s ready, Marines snuck from building to building, clearing out every room and securing their objective. The success of the operation is determined by the captain, and the “enemy” is a squad of the Marines platoon, hiding inside each multiple story building, waiting for the other squads to find them. “By training here, we can better combat terrorism in any area and field,” Hospital Corpsman HM1 Raymond Price elaborated. “Coming to Israel has been an inspirational trip. It’s beautiful to see how Israel has managed to preserve so many years of history, culture and tradition.”

“This trip was a serious wake up call,” said Sgt. Hattenbach. “The instructors at the Adam Base took the time to explain to us what’s been going on in Israel and we realized that Israeli people are just like us. We now better understand what Israel really is and when we go back to the U.S. we can tell people that.”

During earlier exercises that involved IDF forces, the U.S. Marines were impressed by their Israeli counterparts. “The tactics used by the snipers and special forces are much more efficient,” said Cpl. Lombard. “They also focus more on the safety of each individual soldier rather than the mission.”

The company is one of the only young Marines units; all at around 19 years old, they are close in age to IDF soldiers and were able to form close bonds. However, unlike IDF soldiers, the Marines volunteered to enlist. “We have a responsibility for our country,” the Marines said, “You can’t just sit at home hearing of everything going on in the world and remain idle.”

This particular company, the Marine Corps Fast Team Security Forces, enlisted for five years, three of which they spend deployed to Europe or Africa. After further infantry training, they are sent to battle fronts in either Iraq or Afghanistan.Before departing Israel, the company will go for a well-deserved rest at the Dead Sea.

http://www.idf.il/1283-12731-EN/Dover.aspx


IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Grossly overpaid and overrated ADL’s Abe Foxman

August 18, 2011

The Anti-Defamation League’s Flat-Footed, Off-Key Shouter

Redacted from an open letter to the head of the ADL, denouncing his condemnations of those who see Sharia as a threat to American values and liberty.

Grossly overpaid and overrated ADL’s Abe Foxman

Alyssa A. Lappen

Dear Mr. Foxman,

From Rabbi Samuel of Babylonia to Rabbi Gershom of Germany, scholars throughout Jewish history taught the people to adapt to their host nations — and never demand the reverse. Rabbis also prized those students blessed with generosity and sufficient wisdom and humility to admit their errors and apologize to injured parties. No one is perfect, of course, but they correctly tutored Jewish men and women that those trying to achieve these charitable goals (among others) would at least reach goodness.

Alas, as a native of Vilna, Lithuania and child survivor of the Holocaust, none could have shouted more obstreperously than did your Aug. 10 Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) op-ed, headlined “Shout down the Sharia myth makers.”
Leaders do not shout. They speak, listen and continue to learn. Through off-key cheer-leading, you merely highlighted your own ignorance.

“The separation of church and state embodied in U.S. and state constitutions,” you wrote, renders completely unnecessary, proposed “anti-Sharia bills” in several states. Our constitution already “prohibits our courts from applying or considering religious law in any way that would constitute government advancement of or entanglement with religious law.”

Obviously, it would contradict every bedrock American principle to force any U.S. resident — whether citizen, legal resident, or illegal alien — to unwillingly comply with religious law. On this we agree. There, our agreement ends.

For you also allege that the bills — addressing recently exposed U.S. state court outrages imposing foreign laws that infringed upon constitutional law and universal human rights alike — were based not on reality or actual decisions. The bills rest on “prejudice and ignorance,” you claim, advanced through “myth making … about the threat of Sharia” in the U.S. These ills, you further assert, have effected “camouflaged bigotry” against Islam and Muslims.

Theoretically, American courts should strictly adhere to U.S. constitutional law concerning any and all religious practices, edicts or canons. But the record could not be more clear: they too often err on the side of foreign law — and make no apology.

Criminal defendants asked U.S. courts, as I noted to you in March 2011, to substitute Islamic laws in lieu of domestic statutes. In Massachusetts, a federal court denied the motion of jihad-financiers to excuse their terror-funding tax fraud via First Amendment religious freedom guarantees, which they asserted to protect their rights to provide Islamically-mandated “charity.”

Based on sharia, however, a New Jersey court did absolve wife beating and rape before that state’s appeals court reversed its ruling. And a Florida court similarly ordered parties in a civil dispute to follow Islamic, not U.S. law.

Face it, Mr. Foxman: for decades, U.S. courts have also miserably failed Muslim women and children on foundational precepts. On Mar. 24, 1986, for example, Laila Malak lost her 14-year old son and 9-year-old daughter when California’s appeals bench enforced a Beirut sharia custody ruling — given without her knowledge or participation, and allowing only 15 days from her post-facto notification to mount what would almost assuredly have been a futile “appeal.”

Sharia courts always give custody of minor children to fathers, a fact mentioned in footnote 2 to the California’s appeals bench decision. Married to Abdul in 1970 in Beirut, Laila in 1976 fled its bloody religious war with him and their son Fadi, and bore Ruha Jan. 25, 1977, in Abu Dhabi.

In July 1982, without Abdul’s permission (and therefore against Islamic law), Laila moved with her children to her brother’s San Jose home, where she filed for a divorce and custody. Santa Clara county superior court denied three attempts by Abdul to enforce a Nov. 1982 Abu Dhabi sharia order that gave him custody, without due process, Laila’s knowledge or court consideration of the children’s “best interests.”

Sharia courts are not “similar in nature” to U.S. courts, Mr. Foxman. As strictly Islamic judiciaries — neither secular nor civil — these dictatorial forums often force religious law on unwilling victims without recourse. Likely, Laila Malak has never seen her kids again. By contrast, Jewish law would not allow this; nor would a Jewish Beit Din (religious court) ask that its decision replace U.S. criminal, civil or secular law.

Since the 1970s, in dozens of similar cases, American courts nationwide applied sharia in lieu of constitutional laws. Albeit incomplete, a review of state courts and appellate benches produced manifold instances of “unconstitutional application of foreign and religious law in our judicial system.”

Whatever their total, one cannot accurately describe cases unearthed thus far, as “a proverbial solution in search of a problem,” as you want us to believe. For the women and children affected they were life-destroying cataclysms.

No American, nor any Jewish leader, should accept that. You head an institution founded to defend and protect the Jewish people from anti-Semitism. Mr. Foxman, in Islamic nations, sharia laws implement institutional discrimination against Jewish people and other non-Muslims. Sharia demands and requires non-Muslim subservience. Who are you to defend it? How dare you?

Sincerely yours,

Alyssa A. Lappen
Investigative journalist and poet

Sen. Patrick Leahy declares his mis-guided anti-Israel policy recommendations

Zionist Org. of America criticizes Sen. Leahy for Seeking Cut in U.S. Aid to Elite Israel Defense Forces.

http://israel-commentary.org/?p=1303

But Leahy supported increased aid to the Palestinian Authority

Redacted from a press release by Morton Klein, Pres. ZOA
August 17, 2011

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has criticized Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) for promoting a bill that seeks to cut from the U.S. foreign assistance legislation for 2012 the component from U.S. military aid to Israel that is earmarked for three elite Israel Defense Forces (IDF) units – the Israeli Navy’s Shayetet 13 unit, the undercover Duvdevan unit and the Israel Air Force’s Shaldag unit. These units have been on the front lines protecting Israeli citizens in counter-terrorist operations, hunting down terrorists and securing Israel’s borders.

In contrast, Senator Leahy has never called for reducing aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA), despite the PA’s continuing failure to arrest terrorists, outlaw terrorists groups, end the promotion of hatred and violence against Israel and its recently signed unity agreement with Hamas. In fact, he has supported increased aid to the PA.

The ZOA has noted that Senator Leahy’s effort to defund these IDF units has emerged under pressure in his home state from anti-Israel activists seeking to criminalize Israeli self-defense. These activists have sought to have Israel declared guilty of human rights abuses last year when the Israeli Navy’s Shayetet 13 unit lawfully intercepted the Gaza-bound Turkish ship Mavi Mamara to ensure it was free of weaponry. Pro-Hamas operatives and other extremists on board carried out a pre-planned assault upon the Israeli boarding party, leading to the death of nine of the assailants in the resulting clash.

Leahy, who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee’s sub-committee on foreign operations, was the principle sponsor of a 1997 bill prohibiting the United States from providing military assistance or funding to foreign military units suspected of human rights abuses or war crimes.

In recent years, Senator Leahy has been sharply critical of Israel, including of Operation Cast Lead, the counter-offensive launched against Hamas in Gaza following thousands of rockets fired into southern Israel over preceding years. Leahy claimed that Israel had a right to self-defense but then criticized Israel merely for imposing a blockade on Gaza, saying that it had failed to change Hamas policies.

He did not ask whether the blockade’s effort to reduce the flow of weaponry to Hamas had been successful. Leahy also claimed that, “The blockade was not coupled with an effective strategy to address the underlying causes of the conflict.” Leahy found Hamas actions “deplorable” but did not say that Hamas needs to “address the underlying causes” of the conflict by ceasing to be a genocide-seeking terrorist movement calling in its Charter for the world-wide murder of Jews.

Unsurprisingly, Leahy has become very close to J Street, the extremist, left-wing lobby which falsely claims to be pro-Israel while having urged Obama not to veto anti-Israel resolutions in the UN, refused to support Israel’s 2008-9 defensive military operations against Hamas in Gaza and which has lobbied against sanctions on Iran.

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, “Senator Leahy has shown in recent years a propensity to blame Israel for the Arab war on Israel so it is therefore perhaps not surprising that he has now sought to penalize Israel for defending itself, as in the case of the Mavi Mamara affair.

“Now, Senator Leahy has added fuel to the fire by seeking to penalize the brave, professional Israeli military forces that actually perform the dangerous and vital task of protecting Israeli civilians, the first duty of an Israeli government. He seeks to defund parts of the IDF on the basis of allegations of human rights abuses by long-term, hardened, anti-Israel extremists.

“The IDF is not only the indispensible defense force of Israel, it is also an amazingly valuable U.S. ally whose combat experience, innovation and intelligence-gathering have been of immense value to the United States and the U.S. armed forces. The Israeli forces that have had the most experience of dealing with ruthless, blood-thirsty terrorists are precisely the elite units that Senator Leahy has specifically sought to defund.

Great News on Gov. Rick Perry’s Foreign Policy Record

Redacted from article by Reid Smith
The American Spectator, August 11, 2011

Great News on Gov. Rick Perry’s Foreign Policy Record

Talking the Hawk: Regarding Rick Perry’s Foreign Policy

As we all know, this is a big week for GOP contenders. Thursday night’s debate and Saturday’s straw poll are important indicators for the media and Republican establishment as a sneak preview of their future candidate through the prism of perception. Of course, the straw poll is rigged through a stilted system of participatory imbursement — don’t forget Mitt Romney​’s hollow victory in the 2007 Ames ballot — but a win’s a win and one’s performance can fundamentally make or break a candidate’s media image.

Of course, one big name is conspicuously absent from the grand old party held this week in the Hawkeye State. With a campaign rollout planned for South Carolina, New Hampshire and Texas, Rick Perry​ threatens to overshadow the traditional kickstart to the Republican nomination. It’s rumored that the longtime Texas governor may augur up his presidential intentions in South Carolina on Saturday, before formally declaring next week in his home state. Needless to say, whoever comes out on top in the straw poll is bound to share headlines with Governor Perry​.

With Perry’s candidacy looming, some of us international relations wonks have begun to take note of his foreign policy positions. As governor, Perry has been quite the internationalist, taking his traveling sales-pitch to China, Mexico, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Qatar, France and Sweden to support free-market, free trade investment in the great state of Texas.

In a 2009 debate against primary opponent Kay Bailey Hutchinson​, Perry plainly stated that his faith required him to support Israel. This latter statement was bolstered by his trip to the Holy Land where he accepted the Defender of Jerusalem Award before breaking bread with then-President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He put his medal where his mouth is on June 28, 2011, when he wrote Attorney General Eric Holder encouraging him to prosecute Americans who would participate in the “unacceptable provocation” of a Gaza Flotilla against Israel.

Now, Foreign Policy is reporting that former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has introduced Perry to a cabal of would-be national security strategists including former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, former NSC expert William Luti, former Assistant U.S. Attorney and National Review columnist Andrew McCarthy​, the Heritage Foundation’s Asia expert Peter Brookes​, and former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalizad. Rumsfeld’s office confirmed the group gathered last week in Austin to provide Perry with his first national security briefing as a potential presidential candidate.

As governor, Perry has suggested the deployment of American troops to Mexico to control drug violence and proceeded with the execution of a Mexican citizen, despite impassioned requests from their government, President Obama​, the International Court of Justice and former President George W. Bush to stay the sentence.

Understood in context of the hard-line stance he’s taken on matters south of the Rio Grande, his national security team suggests Perry’s shaping up as the traditional defense hawk many conservative have been clamoring for in an age of Obama.

Reid Smith has worked as a research associate specializing on U.S. policy in the Middle East and as a political speechwriter. A doctoral student and graduate associate with the University of Delaware’s Department of Political Science and International Relations, he currently writes for the Foreign Policy Association.

Obama removes Jerusalem from Israel!!

Zionist Org. of America Supreme Court Brief:
White House Web Site Removes References To “Jerusalem, Israel”

Obama removes Jerusalem from Israel!!

August 10, 2011
Redacted from press notice by Morton A. Klein.

ZOA Condemns White House for
Transparent and Outrageous Tactic

AFTER ZOA’S SUPREME COURT AMICUS BRIEF IN JERUSALEM PASSPORT CASE CITED MANY WHITE HOUSE WEB SITE REFERENCES TO “JERUSALEM, ISRAEL” – WHITE HOUSE SUDDENLY REMOVES “ISRAEL”

On August 5, 2011, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) filed an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a petition by Menachem Binyamin Zivotofsky, an American citizen born in Jerusalem who was denied his right under U.S. law to have “Israel” listed as his birthplace on his passport.

In refusing to implement the law, the State Department claimed that enforcing it and listing “Israel” would infringe on the president’s foreign policy powers. The ZOA’s brief refuted that claim, showing that many departments and agencies in the Executive branch – including the Executive Office of the President – routinely refer to Jerusalem as part of Israel, without any evident impact on any presidential power, and thus listing “Israel” on a passport would have no such impact either. Recognizing the persuasive power of this aspect of the ZOA’s argument, the White House has engaged in a shameful and outrageous tactic, this week suddenly changing references to “Jerusalem, Israel” on its Web site to “Jerusalem” only, with no mention of Israel.

Among the many governmental references to “Jerusalem, Israel” described in the ZOA’s amicus brief were several photos posted on the White House Web site, which were taken on the trip that Vice President Joe Biden and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden, made to the Middle East last year. One photo was captioned: “Vice President Joe Biden meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, Israel, March 9, 2010” The caption to another photo read: “Vice President Joe Biden laughs with Israeli President Shimon Peres in Jerusalem, Israel, March 9, 2010” The caption to a third photo said: “Vice President Joe Biden has breakfast with Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair . . . in Jerusalem, Israel, March 10, 2010” Each of these photos is described as an “Official White House Photo.”

Morton A. Klein, ZOA’s National President, and Susan B. Tuchman, Esq., the director of the ZOA’s Center for Law and Justice, condemned the White House for altering the references to “Jerusalem, Israel” on its Web site: We are appalled that the White House would resort to such a transparent and shameful tactic in an effort to diminish the strength of the ZOA’s argument in its amicus brief to the Supreme Court.

But suddenly removing the White House’s references to ‘Jerusalem, Israel’ on its Web site will not help the U.S. government’s case before the Supreme Court. If anything, the White House’s actions show that the government recognizes the strength of the ZOA’s argument:

Given how frequently and routinely the White House and many U.S. departments and agencies have referred to Jerusalem as part of Israel, it is simply absurd to suggest that permitting Menachem Zivotofsky and other Americans born in Jerusalem to have ‘Israel’ listed on their passports will have any impact on any presidential power to make foreign policy or recognize foreign sovereigns. If Jerusalem-born Americans wish to identify with Israel by having it recorded as their birthplace on their passports – which is plainly their right under legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush – that right should be upheld and enforced.

“All of this happened because of the rich people”

The Sun Never Sets On The British Welfare System
By Ann Coulter
08/10/2011

http://israel-commentary.org/?p=1274

Those of you following the barbaric rioting in Britain will not have failed to notice that a sizable proportion of the thugs are white, something not often seen in this country.

Not only that, but in a triumph of feminism, a lot of them are girls. Even the “disabled” (according to the British benefits system) seem to have miraculously overcome their infirmities to dash out and steal a few TVs.

Congratulations, Britain! You’ve barbarized your citizenry, without regard to race, gender or physical handicap!

With a welfare system far more advanced than the United States, the British have achieved the remarkable result of turning entire communities of ancestral British people into tattooed, drunken brutes.

I guess we now have the proof of what conservatives have been saying since forever: Looting is a result of liberal welfare policies. And Britain is in the end stages of the welfare state.

In 2008, a 9-year-old British girl, Shannon Matthews, disappeared on her way home from a school trip. The media leapt on the case — only to discover that Shannon was one of seven children her mother, Karen, had produced with five different men.

The first of these serial sperm-donors explained: “Karen just goes from one bloke to the next, uses them to have a kid, grabs all the child benefits and moves on.”

Poor little Shannon eventually turned up at the home of one of her many step-uncles — whose ex-wife, by the way, was the mother of six children with three different fathers.

(Is Father’s Day celebrated in England? If so, how?)

The Daily Mail (London) traced the family’s proud Anglo ancestry of stable families back hundreds of years. The Nazi war machine couldn’t break the British, but the modern welfare state has.

A year earlier, in 2007, another product of the new order, Fiona MacKeown, took seven of her eight children (by five different fathers) and her then-boyfriend, on a drug-fueled, six-month vacation to the Indian island of Goa. The trip was paid for — like everything else in her life — with government benefits.

(When was the last time you had a free, six-month vacation? I’m drawing a blank, too.)

While in Goa, Fiona took her entourage on a side-trip, leaving her 15-year-old daughter, Scarlett Keeling, in the capable hands of a 25-year-old local whom Scarlett had begun sleeping with, perhaps hoping to get a head-start on her own government benefits. A few weeks later, Scarlett turned up dead, full of drugs, raped and murdered.

Scarlett’s estranged stepfather later drank himself to death, while her brother Silas announced on his social networking page: “My name is Silas, I spend most my life either out wit mates get drunk or at partys, playing rugby or going to da beach (pretty s**t really).”

It’s a wonder that someone like Silas, who has never worked, and belongs to a family in which no one has ever worked, can afford a cellphone for social networking. No, actually, it’s not.

Britain has a far more redistributive welfare system than France, which is why France’s crime problem is mostly a matter of Muslim immigrants, not French nationals. Meanwhile, England’s welfare state is fast returning the native population to its violent 18th-century highwaymen roots.

Needless to say, Britain leads Europe in the proportion of single mothers and, as a consequence, also leads or co-leads the European Union in violent crime, alcohol and drug abuse, obesity and sexually transmitted diseases.

But liberal elites here and in Britain will blame anything but the welfare state they adore. They drone on about the strict British class system or the lack of jobs or the nation’s history of racism.

None of that explains the sad lives of young Shannon Matthews and Scarlett Keeling, with their long English ancestry and perfect Anglo features.

Democrats would be delighted if violent mobs like those in Britain arose here — perhaps in Wisconsin! That would allow them to introduce yet more government programs staffed by unionized public employees, as happened after the 1992 L.A. riots and the 1960s race riots, following the recommendations of the Kerner Commission.

MSNBC might even do the unthinkable and offer Al Sharpton his own TV show. (Excuse me — someone’s trying to get my attention … WHAT?)

Inciting violent mobs is the essence of the left’s agenda: Promote class warfare, illegitimate children and an utterly debased citizenry.

Like the British riot girls interviewed by the BBC, the Democrats tell us “all of this happened because of the rich people.”

We’re beginning to see the final result of that idea in Britain. The welfare state creates a society of beasts. Meanwhile, nonjudgmental elites don’t dare condemn the animals their programs have created.

Rioters in England are burning century-old family businesses to the ground, stealing from injured children lying on the sidewalks and forcing Britons to strip to their underwear on the street.

I keep reading that it’s because they don’t have jobs — which they’re obviously anxious to hold. Or someone called them a “kaffir.” Or their social services have been reduced. Or their Blackberries made them do it. Or they disapprove of a referee’s call in a Manchester United game.

A few well-placed rifle rounds, and the rioting would end in an instant. A more sustained attack on the rampaging mob might save England from itself, finally removing shaved-head, drunken parasites from the benefits rolls that Britain can’t find the will to abolish on moral or utilitarian grounds. We can be sure there’s no danger of killing off the next Winston Churchill or Edmund Burke in these crowds.

But like Louis XVI, British authorities are paralyzed by their indifference to their own civilization. A half-century of berating themselves for the crime of being British has left them morally defenseless. They see nothing about England worth saving, certainly not worth fighting for — which is fortunate since most of their cops don’t have guns.

This is how civilizations die. It can happen overnight, as it did in Revolutionary France. If Britain of 1939 were composed of the current British population, the entirety of Europe would today be doing the “Heil Hitler” salute and singing the “Horst Wessel Song.”

The Appalling Ignorance of Gov. Chris Christie

The Appalling Ignorance of Gov. Chris Christie

Why he lost my vote for Dog Catcher (jsk)

Why Chris Christie Will Never Be President of the United States

By Daniel Pipes
August 5, 2011

Chris Christie, the New Jersey governor since 2010, has qualities and achievements that appeal to mainstream conservatives, from his direct style to his impressive budget cutting. As a result, he has won impressive support to run as a Republican candidate for president of the United States. But Christie has an Achilles Heel that gives one pause.

He came under criticism from fellow conservatives for nominating Sohail Mohammed, an Islamist who aspires to apply Islamic law, the Shari’a, as a state superior court judge; for an outline of these concerns, see the Investigative Project on Terrorism, “Gov. Christie’s Strange Relationship with Radical Islam.”

In response, Christie delivered a tirade on July 26, 2011, on the topic of Shari’a:
Sharia law has nothing to do with this [i.e., the appointment of Sohail Mohammed] at all. It’s crazy. It’s crazy. … So, this Sharia law business is crap. It’s just crazy. And I’m tired of dealing with the crazies. I mean, you know, it’s just unnecessary to be accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background. [Excerpt from 2:43 on the video.]

Comments: (1) These are fighting words against fellow conservatives that will not soon be forgotten: “this Sharia law business is crap. It’s just crazy. And I’m tired of dealing with the crazies.”

(2) Calling critics of Mohammed “crazies” who are “accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background” reveals Christie to be a headstrong ignoramus; the IPT report on Mohammed is not about religious background but political activities.

(3) Contrarily, Christie won the hearty endorsement today of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, (CAIR), whose New Jersey branch issued a statement thanking him, applauding him, and urging a note of gratitude be sent him via the “Contact Us” page at the governor’s website.

(4) Not a bad idea to contact Christie: if you live in New Jersey and wish to register your displeasure, go to http://www.state.nj.us/governor/contact/.

(5) Although still a small issue, Shari’a has grown very fast since 9/11 as a concern to Americans and should continue to do so for many years and decades to come.

(6) Conceivably, Christie could apologize for these remarks and undo much of the damage he’s done himself. But, given his public persona, I doubt this will happen.

(7) Therefore, I predict that Christie’s unremitting Grover Norquist-like friendly attitude toward Islamists will turn conservatives against him and sink his possible candidacy of his for higher office. (August 5, 2011)

Aug. 6, 2011 update: For a substantial reply to Christie’s rant, answering him point by point, see the excellent 2,500-word analysis by Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute. Excerpts from his article, “Christie’s ‘Crazies’: Sharia is not a figment of our imagination”:

sharia concerns can’t be dismissed as “crap.” They help us sort out the pro-American Muslims we want to empower from the Islamists. When we dismiss these concerns, we end up building bridges to all the wrong people, as government has done, to its repeated embarrassment, for two decades.

That is how we end up “partnering” with the likes of Abdurrahman Alamoudi and Sami al-Arian (both ultimately convicted, with their ties to terrorism duly exposed); Salam al-Marayati, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee leader who argued that Israel should be at the top of the 9/11 suspect list; and such Islamist organizations as CAIR and the Islamic Society of North America, which, though not indicted, were shown by the Justice Department to be co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing case.

Governor Christie would have you believe opposition to Mr. Mohammed was sheer bigotry: “It’s just unnecessary to be accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background,” he railed to reporters. It’s a narrative Christie fans would like to help cement. It’s not true. For the record, Sohail Mohammed is not just an attorney. He served as a board member for an Islamist organization, the American Muslim Union.

McCarthy concludes:
The questions about Governor Christie’s appointment of Sohail Mohammed and his exertions on behalf of Mohammed’s client, Mohammed Qatanani, have nothing to do with either sharia or the all-purpose smear of Islamophobia. They are about the governor’s judgment.

They are about a U.S. attorney with political ambitions pandering to a politically active constituency at the expense of national security and enforcement of the immigration laws. They are about his decision to award a state judgeship to an attorney who was an active and vocal board member of a very troubling Islamist organization — and who has a penchant for presuming that perfectly valid anti-terror prosecutions are, instead, anti-Muslim persecutions. Those questions are not answered by bluster.

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2011/08/why-chris-christie-will-never-be-president

Our Christian Role in the Survival of the Jewish State

BY JOSH AHRENS
By a Student from Christians United for Israel on Campus
The Torch Magazine, July 2011

http://israel-commentary.org/?p=1098

In 1896, Reverend William Hechler unexpectedly knocked on Theodor Herzl’s front door. Herzl had never met this bearded man, who frankly announced, “Here I am…Now I am going to help you.” Herzl, the quizzical and secular Jewish journalist and Hechler, the eccentric and well-connected Christian theologian went on to form a relationship through which Herzl gained the recognition needed to promote his idea of a Jewish state.

This improbable contact is considered by many as the beginning of the Zionist relationship with Christianity, and essential in the subsequent recognition of a Jewish state. It has grown from these two men to hundreds of thousands of men and women.

When you meet with students, advisors, faculty, and when you speak up in class, you are participating in this history of unlikely individuals who felt a strong connection with the state of Israel and its citizens, and chose to act accordingly. You are a messenger with potential to impact the future of Israel in a similar way to Reverend Hechler.

I love asking fellow CUFI on Campus members how they heard about CUFI. Nearly every story is of a messenger who arrived unannounced and invited them into this growing, living relationship. To explain the importance of this relationship, consider the effects of the Goldstone Report. After Israel retaliated in 2008-09 against Hamas’ rocket attacks from Gaza, The U.N. Human Rights Council investigated the conflict and charged Israel with launching a, “deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population.”

It has since been shown to be a false accusation. This charge was repeated day after day in the headlines of the most respected newspapers in the world. Justice Richard Goldstone recently wrote in the Washington Post, “We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Commission… If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.”

Yet for over a year in our class discussions about Israel, students accepted the Goldstone Report with a stunning lack of curiosity, and dismissed Israelis as war criminals. It fit so perfectly into their presuppositions about Israel because it was a product of the same environment—an environment virtually absent of Christians properly equipped with the knowledge and courage to counter it. No value system other than Judeo-Christian can reasonably be expected to counter such attacks.

I remember a moment in class when I asked the students to put themselves in the place of Israelis who endured Hamas’ rocket attacks on their communities. Several of them laughed in my face. Everyone else was silent, including the professor. Those who compiled the Goldstone Report could confidently (yet based only on pure, biased speculation) accuse Israelis of deliberately killing innocent Palestinian civilians because they developed their attitudes and perceptions of Israel in this environment.

They have never apologized. Palestinians and Israelis truly suffered because of this failure to distinguish between terrorism and legitimate defensive action. These laughing students will go on to teach your children, write your news, your legislation, your history, and no doubt more documents as flawed as the Goldstone Report.

How has this happened? The answer is very simple; documents like the Goldstone Report are products of this academic climate, which are then ingested by new generations of students who go out into the world and allow this attitude about Israel to color their work, which makes its way back into the classroom, insulated from moral or factual challenges.

This is all changing. There are millions of Christians who are potential Israel advocates on campus, and we in CUFI on Campus are at ground level of unlocking that potential. Anti-Semitism does not stand a chance in the American University against us, if we for once realize the urgency of the problem.

It relies on our inaction. With each event and personal conversation, we are focusing the lens through which srael is viewed for future Goldstones, members of the U.N. Human Rights Council, teachers, pastors and voters. These may be the only chances students and professors have for someone to challenge false images of Israel. With your presence, warmth, and knowledge on campus you play nothing less than a direct and essential role in the survival of a vibrant and secure Jewish state.

This is a moment in history I can’t wait to tell my future children and grandchildren about when I take them to walk the streets of Jerusalem, bicycle in the Negev, and stand on the shores of the Galilee, under the very same flag that flies in Israel today.

Josh Ahrens is a senior at Portland State University studying History and Judaic Studies and President and founding member of Portland State’s CUFI on Campus chapter. He plans to do graduate work in Biblical History and Near Eastern Culture and go on to teach courses and write books that articulate Christianity’s Jewish heritage and Its relation to Christian support for the State of Israel.

A Beautiful Story – for a change

How a German company quietly saved their Jewish employees.

by George Gilbert

The Leica Freedom Train

published in 2009

A Beautiful Story – for a change

The Leica is the pioneer 35mm camera. It is a German product — precise, minimalist, and utterly efficient. Behind its worldwide acceptance as a creative tool was a family-owned, socially oriented firm that during the Nazi era acted with uncommon grace, generosity and modesty. E. Leitz, Inc., designer and manufacturer of Germany’s most famous photographic product, saved the company’s Jews.

And Ernst Leitz II, the steely-eyed Protestant patriarch who headed the closely held firm as the Holocaust loomed across Europe, acted in such a way as to earn the title, “The Photography Industry’s Schindler.”

As soon as Adolf Hitler was named chancellor of Germany in 1933, Ernst Leitz II began receiving frantic calls from Jewish associates, asking for his help in getting them and their families out of the country. As Christians, Leitz and his family were, of course, immune to Nazi Germany’s Nuremberg laws, which restricted the movement of Jews and limited their professional activities.

To help his Jewish workers and colleagues, Leitz quietly established what has become known among historians of the Holocaust as “The Leica Freedom Train,” a covert means of allowing Jews to leave Germany in the guise of Leitz employees being assigned overseas.

Employees, retailers, family members, and friends of family members were “assigned” to Leitz sales offices in France, Britain, Hong Kong and the United States.

Leitz’s activities intensified after the Kristallnacht of November 1938, during which synagogues and Jewish shops were burned throughout Germany. Before long, German “employees” were disembarking from the ocean liner Bremen at a New York pier and making their way to the Manhattan office of Leitz, Inc., where executives quickly found them jobs in the photographic industry. Each new arrival had around his or her neck the symbol of freedom — a new Leica.

The refugees were paid a stipend until they could find work. Out of this migration came designers, repair technicians, salespeople, marketers, and writers for the photographic press.

The “Leica Freedom Train” was at its height in 1938 and early 1939, delivering groups of refugees to New York every few weeks.

Then, with the invasion of Poland on Sept. 1, 1939, Germany closed its borders. By that time, hundreds of endangered Jews had escaped to America, thanks to the Leitzes’ efforts.

How did Ernst Leitz II and his staff get away with it?

Leitz’s daughter was imprisoned by the Gestapo after she was caught helping Jewish women cross into Switzerland.

Leitz Inc. was an internationally recognized brand that reflected credit on the newly resurgent Reich. The company produced range-finders and other optical systems for the German military. Also, the Nazi government desperately needed hard currency from abroad, and Leitz’s single biggest market for optical goods was the United States.

Even so, members of the Leitz family and firm suffered for their good works. A top executive, Alfred Turk, was jailed for working to help Jews, and was freed only after the payment of a large bribe.

Leitz’s daughter, Elsie Kuhn-Leitz, was imprisoned by the Gestapo after she was caught at the border, helping Jewish women cross into Switzerland. She was eventually freed, but had endured rough treatment in the course of being questioned. She also fell under suspicion when she attempted to improve the living conditions of more than 700 Ukrainian slave laborers, all of them women, who had been assigned to work in the plant during the 1940s. After the war, Kuhn-Leitz received numerous honors for her humanitarian efforts, among them the Officier d’honneur des Palms Academic from France in 1965 and the Aristide Briand Medal from the European Academy in the 1970s.

Why has no one told this story until now?

According to the late Norman Lipton, a freelance writer and editor, the Leitz family wanted no publicity for its heroic efforts. Only after the last member of the Leitz family was dead did “The Leica Freedom Train” come to light. It became the subject of a book, “The Greatest Invention of the Leitz Family: The Leica Freedom Train,” by Frank Dabba Smith.

From: www.aish.com

Killings in Norway not a random target.

No matter, Norwegians prefer blinders and anti-Semitism. Don’t confuse them with the facts.

Killings in Norway not a random target.

Something Rotten in Norway
Posted by Daniel Greenfield
Aug 1st, 2011
FrontPageMag.com

Anders Breivik’s attack on the youth camp of the Norwegian Labour Party has its most obvious precedent in the Maalot Massacre when Palestinian Muslim gunmen attacked an Israeli elementary school, taking over a hundred children hostage, and then using automatic weapons to kill as many of them as they could.

But the link between Maalot and Utoya is more than casual. The Workers Youth League which ran the camp had a long history of supporting the same kind of terrorists who had perpetrated the Maalot Massacre.

Lars Gule, is the Secretary General of the Norwegian Humanist Association, and a defender of Muslims having the right to discriminate against women and gays. (The two are not a contradiction in Norway.) He was the leader of the Workers Youth League at the University of Bergen and a DFLP terrorist.

The DFLP were the perpetrators of the Maalot Massacre. And two years after that attack, Lars Gule was trained by the DFLP and dispatched to Israel via Norway with explosives hidden in the covers of his books. “The Suspect had made it known to his employers that he wanted to take human life…  to strengthen Palestinian fighting spirit and morale,” Norwegian police records noted.

None of this impeded Gule’s career in any way. He went on to the University of Bergen and served as the head of the Workers Youth League, the organization that was targeted in the Utoya attack. Today he is a prominent figure on the left.

How can we make sense of this? Glenn Beck compared the Workers Youth League camp to a Hitler Youth camp. He was close, but not entirely right. The roots of the Workers Youth League are actually Communist.

Norway’s Labour Party was a member of the Communist International. The Workers Youth League was formed by the merger of the Left Communist Youth League and the Socialist Youth League of Norway. We often use “Communist” as a pejorative, but in this case the Utoya camp, literally was a Communist youth camp.

The day before the massacre, Norwegian Foreign Minister Gahre-Store visited the camp and was greeted with banners calling for a boycott of Israel, and Gahre-Store responded with an Anti-Israel speech to cheers from the campers. There is something ominous about such indoctrination of hate. It is not quite on the level of the Hitler Youth, but neither is it a world apart.

In the 1930′s, Germans were encouraged to blame their problems on the Jews. In this decade, Norwegians are encouraged to blame their problems on the Jews. There are few children of workers at the Workers Youth League camp. They are for the most part the children of the party, the sons and daughters of bureaucrats and party leaders, training the next generation to perpetrate the Labour Party state.

Breivik came from that same background. The son of the left wing elite. And if his parents’ marriage had not collapsed, with the young boy allotting a share of the blame to the Labour Party, he would likely have a comfortable spot in the socialist state. Breivik may have turned against his roots, but the idea that terroristic violence is a legitimate solution is one that he could have easily picked up on the left.

Gahre-Store may have been greeted with a banner calling for the boycott of Israel, but he would never have been greeted with one calling for a boycott of terrorists. And indeed if there is an Islamist terrorist group that Gahre-Store doesn’t support, it’s hard to find. Gahre-Store had called for negotiating with Al-Shahaab in Somalia, an Al-Qaeda offshoot, he spoke with Hamas leader Khaled Mashal and called for a reconciliation with the Taliban.

Media commentators have made a great deal of Breivik’s radicalization, but despite his death toll, his radicalization seems to be an isolated event in comparison to the magnitude of radicalization at Utoya. If Breivik’s violence and bigotry is to be condemned– shouldn’t the species of violence and bigotry at Utoya be condemned as well?

The left can hold up Utoya as an example, but there are a legion of counterexamples. Nor the least of which is Lars Gule, traveling with explosives in his backpack, on a journey that took him from DFLP terrorist to Workers Youth League leader.

And behind that is the larger string of DFLP and Fatah atrocities. And that of other terrorist groups around the world. The Utoya attack cannot be viewed as an isolated event. It must be seen within the context of support for terrorism as a valid tactic. An idea that goes back to the Marxist roots of the Labour Party and which is embodied in its political support for terrorism. And its manifest hostility to the victims of terrorism.

Breivik and Lars Gule had their common origins in a country dominated by a political left which sees violence as a legitimate tool of political change, while dehumanizing its victims. Norway’s ambassador to Israel carefully distinguished between the Utoya attack and the terrorist attacks on Israelis. The latter would go away if Israel just followed Gahre-Store’s example and negotiated with Hamas.

But what Norway’s political elite failed to grasp is that the genie of terrorism cannot be kept in a lamp, to emerge only at your command. Once you legitimize terrorism as a tool of political change, you lose the ability to determine who will make use of it. Breivik followed the example of Lars Gule, that of the Marxist terrorists, whose intellectual legacy is the black tar that seeps through the painted walls of Norwegian foreign policy.

The hatred and terrorist collaboration on display at Utoya was the symptom of a larger disease. “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark,” Marcellus proclaims in Hamlet. It’s equally rotten in Norway.

Breivik was one expression of that rottenness. But there are many others. Like Lars Gule, and his vision of a secular atheism living side by side with bigoted Islamism. Or Gahre-Store following in the footsteps of countless left wing foreign ministers by opening Norway’s doors to every Islamist terrorist group out there. Or the children being groomed to become the future leaders of Norway taught to hate as fervently as their Fatah associates.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.