Please see Holocaust Documentary video at the end of this article
Yom HaShoah, also known as Holocaust Remembrance Day, occurs on the 27th of the Hebrew month of Nissan. This year, on the English calendar, it occurs Monday, May 2, 2011.
Shoah, which means catastrophe or utter destruction in Hebrew, refers to the atrocities that were committed against the Jewish people during World War II. This is a memorial day for those who died in the Shoah.
The Shoah (also known as the Holocaust, from a Greek word meaning “sacrifice by fire,”) was initiated by the members of the German National Socialist (Nazi) Party, which seized power in Germany in 1933, with Adolph Hitler as chancellor. The Nazis believed in a doctrine of racial superiority, centering around the idea that people of Northern European descent were somehow better than members of all other races – especially the Jews, who were “unworthy of life.”
After taking power, the German Nazis gradually restricted the rights of German Jewish citizens and encouraged their followers to commit acts of violence and destruction against Jews and their property. During World War II (1939-1945), the Nazis implemented their “Final Solution,” a plan to concentrate Jews in camps and annihilate all European Jews. Jews were first crammed together in ghettoes and slave-labor camps, where disease, brutality, and malnutrition ran rampant.
Eventually, they were sent to death camps, where millions were murdered in special facilities designed to kill a tremendous number of people over a brief period of time. In addition to the six million Jews who died – two-thirds of the European Jewish population – the “willing executioners” (Please read Hitler’s Willing Executioners by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen) of almost all of the other major countries of Europe (Poles, Austrians, Vichy French, Hungarians, Romanians, Estonians, Greeks, Latvians, Lithuanians, etc.) enthusiastically cooperated with the German Nazis killing millions of their own Jewish population that had live peacefully among them for centuries.
Also deliberately and systematically killed by the Nazi Germans and their “willing executioners” were Gypsies, Slavs, political and religious dissidents, the handicapped, gays and lesbians and hundreds of thousands of others.
Today, many Jewish communities commemorate Yom HaShoah by lighting yellow candles in order to keep the memories of the victims alive, declaring “Never Again” – which of course, remains to be seen – depending upon whether or not “Hitler’s Willing Executioners” are once again, ready to enlist.
Maniacs like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran proudly declares that he plans to eliminate Israel which now contains approximately 1/3 of the world’s remaining Jews. Who is going to stop him? Will the Western so-called civilized nations stop them? Will the UN stop them? Will the European Union stop them? Will the United States stop them? Will these august bodies give the Israelis full license to defend their own people in every way possible? Will the Israeli government have the courage to do exactly that? And most important, will the almighty
G-d see that this monstrous travesty against humanity does not indeed, happen again.
By Israel International News Service (Arutz Sheva) staff
April 29, 2011
Yesha Council Chairman Danny Dayan called on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to cancel his upcoming Bar-Ilan II speech and annex Area C in Judea and Samaria. “The prime minister must cancel Bar-Ilan II and say one thing,” Dayan said. “That Bar-Ilan I is off the table – a Palestinian state will not arise.”
Bar Ilan I is a reference to a speech given by Netanyahu at Bar Ilan University in June 2009 which he laid out his criteria for the creation of a PA state. Among those criteria were the exclusion and destruction of Hamas, defensible borders for Israel, recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, and Jerusalem as Israel’s united capital.
On Wednesday PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas agreed to admit Hamas to the PA, and PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said the PA would begin moving unilaterally to make eastern Jerusalem its capital.
Netanyahu’s upcoming speech at Bar Ilan, dubbed Bar Ilan II by pundits, was expected to be an updated installment of his original Bar Ilan speech for the Israeli public before Netanyahu travels to the U.S. where he will address Congress.
But Israeli politicians and pundits alike have been left guessing about the content of his Bar Ilan II speech as it comes after two years of stalled talks and the PA decision to abrogate the Oslo Accords and seek a unilateral declaration of PA statehood by the United Nations in September.
Dayan says he hopes Netanyahu will seize the maximum benefit from new developments. “There are now two crises,” Dayan said. “The PA has chosen to cancel all agreements with Israel and go to the U.N. and they also decided to admit Hamas to their ranks. Every crisis is also an opportunity. The prime minister should say he no longer consents to a PA state, that we are released from Oslo, and move to fulfull Zionist dreams.”
Dayan believes the annexation of Area C is now a required step. “It’s not enough for Israel say she no longer consents to a Palestinian state, but it’s time to exert Israeli sovereignty and annex the open spaces and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. It is time we become citizens with equal rights like citizens in any other place in the country. The Palestinians launched a political war against us, but it’s not strong enough in real terms to win.”
Dayan called on politicians to restore the confidence and sense of security of Israelis in Judea and Samaria, who he says were often abandoned to the PA police under Oslo. “I’m having a lot of meetings with Central Command and the commander in Judea and Samaria,” Dayan said. “And in meeting with them I begin with a warning about security cooperation with PA security forces. The notion is completely surreal and the proof is what we saw happen at Joseph’s Tomb.”
Dayan argued that despite mistakes made since the Oslo Accords were signed, the Israeli army is a strong army and can solve the problems that now exist. “Of course we made mistakes and will pay them a price,” Dayan said philosophically. “We were wrong. But we should not scare ourselves. We should now restore confidence. If Hamas will take over the cities of Judea and Samaria, we must make it clear we will go back to them – Hevron, Shechem, and Ramallah – and return them to Israeli control.”
“We need to pressure Netanyahu to use the situation to Israel’s advantage… to declare the Oslo process, which was the biggest strategic mistake Israel ever made, dead. We’ve paid with over 1,000 dead already. Withdraw immediately the government’s assent for a PA state. The army needs to announce all security cooperation agreements are off and take full responsibility for all Israeli citizens’ security today, not tomorrow.”
“This is the responsibility of political leadership,” Dayan said. “The prime minister is the one who must take the decision. He should show he is committed. It is time to return to Zionist activism and leave the dark days of Oslo behind us.”
Relinquishing Joseph’s Tomb was supposed to be temporary
By Michael Freund
The Jerusalem Post, April 28, 2011
Earlier this week, an incident occurred that should have provoked outrage across the civilized world. In an act of wanton slaughter, Palestinian policemen opened fire at a convoy of Jewish worshipers near Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus on Sunday. The men had just recited morning prayers at the Jewish holy site in honor of Pessah, and were heading home to prepare for the end of the festival. But they never made it.
At a checkpoint near the tomb, our ostensible peace partners killed Ben-Yosef Livnat, 25, and wounded four other Israelis, one of them critically. Livnat, a nephew of Culture and Sport Minister Limor Livnat, left a wife and four young children. Even as the Israeli vehicles sought to escape, the Palestinian policemen reportedly continued to fire on them.
Although the IDF initially refrained from labeling the episode an “attack,” it’s clear that that is precisely what it was. And by Sunday evening, both Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak were calling the shooting an act of “murder.”
Palestinian officials were quick to point out that the Israeli worshipers had failed to coordinate their visit in advance – as though that somehow justified shooting at them. But as Barak rightly noted: “No problem of coordination can justify an incident like this and the shooting of innocent people.”
Even though the identity of the perpetrators is known, none have been detained as of this writing. And given the Palestinian Authority’s track record in punishing those who attack Israelis, there is no reason to suspect that the policemen in question will be made to pay for their crime.
Needless to say, barely a peep was heard from the international community over this brazen assault on the fundamental right of Jews to worship freely. Just imagine what the reaction would have been had Palestinian worshipers leaving a mosque been attacked by Israeli policemen.. We all know how that would have gone down. But the hypocrisy on display should hardly come as a surprise. After all, the Palestinians have been targeting Joseph’s Tomb for years with impunity.
Who can forget October 7, 2000, when Palestinian policemen and Fatah terrorists launched a coordinated assault on the Israeli soldiers guarding the site? After then-prime minister Barak ordered the army to withdraw, a Palestinian mob went on a rampage. Brandishing sledge-hammers and other tools of tolerance, they demolished the tomb – one of the most sacred sites of the Jewish people. In subsequent years, after the structure was repaired, Palestinian vandals repeatedly ransacked and desecrated it.
The Palestinian conduct vis-à-vis the tomb is a clear violation of signed commitments. The Oslo II Accords, signed on September 28, 1995, spelled out specific arrangements concerning Joseph’s Tomb in Article V(2b) of Annex I, which were designed “to ensure free, unimpeded and secure access” to the site.
So much for relying on the Palestinians to keep their word.
The murder of Ben-Yosef Livnat cannot be allowed to pass without a forceful Israeli response. It is simply intolerable that an Israeli can be gunned down in cold blood by a Palestinian policeman.To begin with, Israel should arrest the gunmen who carried out this attack and bring them to trial before an Israeli court. There cannot and must not be immunity for those who murder Israeli citizens.
Moreover, it is time to correct the error made nearly 11 years ago, when Israel forsook this holy place. After the IDF withdrew, the Israeli public was assured that the step was not permanent, but merely a tactical move dictated by the situation on the ground. Just hours after the retreat, the website of Yediot Aharonot reported: “Israel pulls out of Joseph’s Tomb – ‘Temporarily.'” But here we are, more than a decade later, and the tomb still remains “temporarily” abandoned by the Jewish state, in what has become a mark of shame for our nation.
Israel should annex the site, forever restoring it to our exclusive control. And measures should be taken to ensure that Jews can visit safely whenever they wish. As of now, Israelis are allowed to visit once or twice a month, under cover of darkness, like thieves in the night. No nation with even a modicum of dignity would allow such a situation to persist at the tomb of one of its founding fathers.
So let’s put an end to this disgrace. Doing so will send a strong message to our foes, underlining once and for all that the Jewish people will neither cower nor flee. It is time to raise the Israeli flag over Joseph’s Tomb and reclaim this site, and with it, our self-respect as well.
Serbia and Israel – Two Nations under Islamic Duress
Redacted from article by Victor Sharpe
See video at end of article:
James Jatras: Muslim Extermination Of Kosovo Christians
The Battle of Kosovo, 1389, on the “Field of Blackbirds.” In the 14th century, the Byzantine Empire began to crumble, finally falling to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. But in 1389, the Ottoman Turkish sultan, Murad 1, began to lead his forces against the armies of the Serbian prince Lazar. The Serbian prince had already been active in resisting increasing Muslim raids against Christian lands in the Balkans and had called his barons, knights and warriors together to ask them if they should fight or become slaves, dhimmis, to the Muslims. The decision was made to fight although their forces would number some 35,000 against a Turkish Muslim host of 100,000. But better to fight than to be enslaved. The place chosen to make a stand against the Muslim Turks was at Kosovo Polje (the Field of Blackbirds) in Kosovo — the heartland of the Serbian nation. It was in June, 1389, on St. Vitus Day (Vidovdan), that the rival forces met.
The battle began at first light with Serbian successes and the great Serbian hero, Milos Obilic, killed the Turkish Muslim sultan, Murad. For a while the Turks were in disarray but they managed to recover and by their sheer weight of numbers ground down and defeated the Serbian army.
It was not a mere military defeat, but the end of Serbian independence and the beginning of 500 years of Christian suffering under the Muslim yoke. But worse still, the Serbian heartland of Kosovo was lost. For the Serbian people, the blood shed at the Battle of Kosovo in the Field of Blackbirds marks Kosovo as eternally Serbian .
Another year in history that haunts the memory of a different people, who also suffered the loss of their eternal capital city, is the year 70 AD. It was in that terrible year that the Roman general, Titus, finally came with overwhelming force against the Jewish capital city, Jerusalem. Jerusalem was finally destroyed after a frightful siege in which hundreds of thousands died of disease and hunger.
Centuries pass but history has an almost supernatural way of repeating itself. Fast forward to the twentieth and twenty first centuries and both Serbia and the Jewish homeland are linked by eerie circumstances. Both are falsely demonized in the mainstream press as aggressors when, in fact, they are the victims, and both are under relentless aggression from Islam.
But let us consider the new gold of our times and how it shapes politics and war: Oil, which greases the machinery of geo-politics and lubricates the revenge and envy that nation states harbor towards each other. The need for oil makes and destroys states and peoples and too often befouls humanity.
It is still a necessary evil, but much of this black gold happens by fate to lie under the sands of the Arab Middle East and the Islamic Republic of Iran and thus morphs into a terrible weapon wielded by Arab despots and Islamo-fascist fanatics.
The late 20th century’s insane rush to create Kosovo as yet another Muslim autonomous region in the heart of the Balkans, was a testament to the curse of oil. Ever ready to enrich their economies, the Europeans and, sadly, the Clinton Administration combined to appease and placate the Arab and Muslim kings, emirs, imams and assorted dictators. And it was in Europe that Arab oil drove the creation of a Muslim statelet, Kosovo, that is rapidly becoming a radical Islamist Balkan beachhead, filled with jihadists from around the Islamic world, ready to threaten what is left of Christian Europe. In time it will inevitably become a springboard for terror into both the United States and Russia.
And we must realize that Israel, too, is threatened by the same evil created by Arab oil. The Arabs who call themselves Palestinians demand Judaism’s eternal holy city of Jerusalem and the Jewish heartland of Judea and Samaria (known by the erroneous Arab name, the West Bank). In this, the baleful influence of President Barack Hussein Obama looms large, just as the Serbian people’s heartland of Kosovo was stolen from them with the connivance and brute force of President Clinton and his diplomats, Richard Holbrooke and Madeleine Albright.
Under relentless U.S State Department pressure, the Israeli government of Prime Minister Netanyahu is enduring the same attempt at the dismemberment of its biblical, ancestral, aboriginal, spiritual and physical Jewish heartland as the brave and ill served Serbian people suffered with the loss of their beloved Kosovo.
The lesson for Israel is that foreign powers have conspired to strip the expendable Serbs of their ancestral heartland and give it to the Muslims. These same western powers believe that by placating and ingratiating themselves with the oil rich Arab and Muslim world they enrich their own economies.
Caroline Glick, wrote in the Feb 23, 2008 Jerusalem Post:
“… the lessons of Kosovo are clear. Not only should Israel join Russia, Canada, China, Spain, Romania and many others in refusing to recognize Kosovo. It should also state that as a consequence of Kosovo’s independence, Israel rejects the deployment of any international forces to Gaza or Judea and Samaria, and refuses to cede its legal right to sovereignty in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Jerusalem to international arbitration.”…
Contributing Editor Victor Sharpe
￼Book review by Sally Pipes
The Washington Times, April 18, 2011
ObamaCare video at end of review, along with reader comment.
By Grace-Marie Turner, James P. Capretta, Thomas P. Miller and Robert E. Moffit, Broadside Books, $14.99, 272 pages
HOW THE NEW HEALTH CARE LAW DRIVES UP COSTS, PUTS GOVERNMENT IN CHARGE OF YOUR DECISIONS, AND THREATENS YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
“ObamaCare is wrong for families, wrong for patients, wrong for business, and wrong for our children’s futures.” That’s the thesis, laid out on the first page of the must-read “Why ObamaCare is Wrong for America,” a powerful book co-written by four battle-tested veterans of Washington’s health policy battles.
There is no doubt that those concerned with less government involvement in our health care system lost the 2009 and 2010 health care battle, a discouraging episode in which facts seemed not to matter and wishful thinking and power politics prevailed. Yet this is not a bitter tale, and there are no sour grapes. It’s a positive book driven by the insight that nothing is ever final in politics and just as President Obama and his band of congressional Democrats could run roughshod over public opinion and force the unpopular plan through a compliant Congress, so too can committed individuals, armed with facts and logic, reverse this disastrous piece of legislation – the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
It won’t be easy, but then nothing worthwhile ever is. This book serves as a handbook for dismantling Obamacare and reforming American health care in a manner consistent with individual liberty and the U.S. Constitution. Upfront, the authors promise to detail what the “2,801 pages of legislation” will mean for “families, young adults, senior citizens, people with health problems, physicians and other medical professionals, small business owners and entrepreneurs, employers and employees, taxpayers, and citizens.”
In short, the authors provide a comprehensive examination of the biggest piece of social legislation since the Great Society. And it delivers.The book begins by reminding readers of the horror of Obamacare and how it came to be the law of the land. The numbers are staggering. The law “creates an estimated 159 new agencies, boards, commissions and government offices.”
It replays the deception.
Candidate Obama promised a plan that would reduce costs for average Americans by $2,500. His plan will actually increase costs by $2,100. Candidate Obama opposed both the individual mandate and new taxes on health benefits. His plan is based on an individual mandate and relies on taxes not only on health plans but on all Americans.
The book chronicles the smoke and mirrors and Beltway bookkeeping. Mr. Obama’s Democrats could plausibly balance the books over the first decade only by combining 10 years of taxes with just six years of benefits. The plan eliminates $575 billion in Medicare spending but, amazingly, double-counts the revenue as both available for funding subsidies for the Obama plan and as a major expansion of Medicaid. Most startling, it pegs the total cost of the first 10 years of the program at $2.3 trillion.
Then the book gets deep, making good on its promises in the early pages. The authors devote individual chapters to what Obamacare will mean for families and young adults, seniors, vulnerable Americans, you and your doctor, taxpayers, and you and your constitutional rights. In the chapter on young families, the authors detail how the shift of power and control to Washington already has destroyed markets, such as child-only policies, and how it soon will increase costs.
For seniors, the news is even worse, as Medicare became a chief funding source for the government expansion. “In short,” the authors write, “ObamaCare is going to reduce your choices, impair your access to care, and increase your costs.” For doctors, the net effect of the law, which produced more than 4,100 pages of new regulations in its first six months, will be a deluge of “red tape and bureaucracy.”
The book finishes as strong as it starts. The final two chapters are devoted to laying out a positive path to reform and guiding activists and concerned Americans on how to dismantle the current law. At the end of the day, there is little new under the sun.
The choice is – and always has been – between policies that reward politicians while building bureaucracy and those that respect individuals and harness the power of free markets and entrepreneurs. The authors outline a program they call a defined-contribution approach to health care, tipping their hats to the popular and liberating 401(k) retirement plans.
Their preferred program consists of meaningful tax credits that level the playing field between employer-funded and individually purchased health insurance, tort reform, high-risk pools for the uninsurable, and real reform for Medicaid and Medicare. It doesn’t promise universal insurance coverage. This too is an improvement over Obamacare, which promised universal coverage but doesn’t produce it.
By 2019, 23 million Americans will still be uninsured under Obamacare, unless it is repealed and replaced.
One of the book’s great contributions is its deft weaving of the important principles at stake and the details of how the mammoth law shifts our body politic in the wrong direction. “The health law reflects an ideology that moves power and control away from individuals and toward government and agents,” the authors write. In so doing, they make an important move in shifting the momentum back to individuals.
Sally C. Pipes is president and health care studies fellow at the Pacific Research Institute. Her latest book is “The Truth About Obamacare” (Regnery, 2010).
P.S. She is not a politician
An astute reader just presented the concern that because the name of the web page is Israel Commentary, we should not be commenting on US domestic politics because it gives the impression that the state of Israel is somehow involved, which, of course, it is not. Israel is always extremely careful to stay out of American politics and I am sorry to generate the opposite impression. Perhaps I have to print a disclaimer for Israel every time I do present domestic issues? That’s probably what I will have to do because this web site is definitely involved with many issues that have nothing to do with Israel. Please accept my apologies for the understandable misconception now and in the future.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton host Islamic World Forum in DC
Video of Barack Obama declaring his Islamic faith at end of article
April 12th, 2011
Law Enforcement Examiner
In the Obama Administration’s continuing effort to embrace Muslims and their culture, the United States government will for the first time host an international Islamic forum held annually in the Middle East and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will headline the three-day event which begins today, according to a public-interest watchdog group that investigates and prosecutes government and political corruption.
Created to address issues critical to Arabs and Muslims, the U.S.-Islamic World Forum will come to Washington D.C. this week after eight years in Qatar. Clinton will be America’s friendly host for the duration of the event, which begins Tuesday, and she will deliver the keynote address at a gala dinner on the first day, said officials from Judicial Watch.
Last year Hillary Clinton was the first senior member of a U.S. administration to participate in the U.S.-Islamic World Forum, which was held last February in Doha. At the event she announced President Obama’s “new era of diplomatic engagement” with nations that have been “hostile to the United States” and promised to close the military prison at Guantanamo because it had “become a symbol of the wrong way to make America more secure.”
“I wonder how Secretary Clinton will announce that Gitmo won’t be closed as promised and that terrorists will be tried by the U.S. military justice system instead of the civilian courts? What sort of verbal gymnastics will she and Obama employ to ease the concerns of the Islamists?” former intelligence officer and New York police detective Mike Snopes rhetorically asked.
President Barack Obama recently participated via a video message that called for a “new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world.” The commander-in-chief outlined a “government-wide approach” to improve the daily lives of Muslims and a commitment from senior administration officials — such as Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano— to engage Muslim communities in the U.S., said Judicial Watch officials.
Obama pledged to seek new partnerships in Muslim communities around the world and touted his efforts to engage with “faith leaders” and “civil society groups” to improve the nation’s relationship with Muslims. The efforts are necessary, according to Obama, because the “United States and Muslims around the world have often slipped into a cycle of misunderstanding and mistrust that can lead to conflict rather than cooperation.”
“This is almost the same liberal-left message we heard during the Cold War. While President Ronald Reagan portrayed it as a battle between the U.S. and the Evil Empire, the Soviet Union, the political left — some of whom are still in public office — portrayed it as a misunderstanding,” said political strategist Mike Baker.
A similar message is expected to be delivered at this year’s conference, which is being promoted as a platform for dialogue at the highest level between U.S. and Muslim public officials. The focus in Washington will be on the rapid, turbulent change in the Middle East and implications for Muslims around the world. The goal is to foster unique, positive relationships between policy makers business, cultural and religious leaders from across the Muslim world and the United States.
According to Judicial Watch, bringing the Islamic forum to the U.S. is simply the latest of many Muslim outreach efforts for the administration. In the last year alone Napolitano discussed national security matters with a group of extremist Muslim organizations, the nation’s space agency (NASA) was ordered to focus on Muslim diplomacy and Clinton signed a special order to allow the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties long banned them from the U.S.
The Obama Administration also sent an America-bashing mosque leader (Feisal Abdul Rauf) who blames U.S. foreign policy for the 9/11 attacks on a Middle Eastern outreach mission and ordered a government-funded meal program for home-bound seniors to offer halal cuisine prepared according to Islamic law.
The Justice Department also created a special Arab-American and Muslim Engagement Advisory Group to foster greater communication, collaboration and a new level of respect between law enforcement and Muslim and Arab-American communities, Judicial Watch pointed out.
Special thanks to Judicial Watch’s Jill Farrell, director of communications, for her valuable information.
Jim Kouri, CPP, formerly Fifth Vice-President, is currently a Board Member of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, an editor for ConservativeBase.com, and he’s a columnist for Examiner.com.
WHISTLEBLOWER March, 2011 Entire issue devoted to warning us.
Who will pay attention?
Video at end of article: The Muslim Brotherhood – Frank Gaffney
KNOW THINE ENEMY: The Muslim Brotherhood’s secret plan to ‘destroy Western Civilization from within.'”
“Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”
Does that sound like the motto of a nice, peaceful, non-violent, secular organization? President Obama and his national intelligence director James Clapper think so. But contrary to the perversely rosy assessment of America’s top leadership, the Muslim Brotherhood – the shadowy, transnational Islamist parent organization of al-Qaida and Hamas – is committed not only to filling the growing leadership vacuum in the Arab world, but also, through its many proxies within the U.S, to impose the Quran and Shariah law right here in America.
If that sounds too fantastic or improbable to take seriously, you will harbor no such doubts after reading the March issue of Whistleblower, with 18 authoritative articles written on just that subject.
Incredibly, the Muslim Brotherhood is attacking America using the exact same strategy and tactics employed so successfully by the left. That’s right. For decades, while America was furiously fighting communism overseas and struggling to neutralize the threat of nuclear war, the very same Marxist enemy was busily infiltrating America and eating away at its moral foundation like termites – subverting core institutions such as education, the news and entertainment media and even churches. As a direct result, America today increasingly resembles a European-style socialist welfare state – exactly what the Marxists had in mind all along.
Today, while America is focused on the threat of terrorist hijackers, underwear bombers and jihadist “martyrs,” it is simultaneously being infiltrated and subverted by jihadists wearing coats and ties, “peacefully” insinuating themselves into our major institutions for the ultimate purpose of imposing Shariah law here. Shariah, Islam’s “sacred” 7th century legal system, is best known for chopping off the limbs of shoplifters, publicly flogging people for drinking a beer, executing those who leave Islam, stoning women to death for adultery, and even – believe it or not – lashing and imprisoning women and girls who were victims of rape.
In “KNOW THINE ENEMY,” Whistleblower has brought together many of the world’s most knowledgeable and courageous experts on this expansionist, utopian, violent, Nazi-like threat to not only the troubled Arab world, but to the entire world, including Europe, the UK and America. “This issue of Whistleblower is a compelling wake-up call to a preoccupied and beleaguered American citizenry,” said David Kupelian, WND managing editor and Whistleblower editor.
“Shariah law is already making inroads in America, from our courts to our financial establishments. We are also seeing ‘honor killings’ in our suburbs, jihad recruitment in our colleges and our prisons, a proliferation of mosques and Islamic schools funded with Saudi money, and dozens of subversive and dangerous Muslim groups with nice-sounding names masquerading as ‘moderate, charitable and cultural’ organizations. But their goal is precisely the same as that of the terrorists’ – the ultimate submission of Americans to Islam.”
Highlights of “KNOW THINE ENEMY” include:
“The global Islamist revolt is here” by Joseph Farah, who pulls the veil off what we are witnessing throughout the Arab world
“The Muslim Brotherhood’s sneak attack on America” by David Kupelian, on expansionist Islam’s two-front war on America and why “moderate” Shariah supremacists are more dangerous than terrorists
Key U.S. Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, compiled by “Muslim Mafia” co-author Paul Sperry
“Muslim straightens out U.S. intel director on Brotherhood,” in which the courageous Muslim Dr. Zudhi Jasser refutes the clueless pronouncements of America’s top intelligence official regarding the Islamist threat
“The Muslim Brotherhood ‘Project’ for North America” by Brigitte Gabriel, on the secret 100-year plan to “establish an Islamic government on earth”
“Don’t fear the Brotherhood, says long-time member,” highlighting the argument that “the West and the Muslim Brotherhood are not enemies,” made by Abdel Moneim Abou el-Fotouh, part of the organization’s guidance council for 25 years
“Muslim groups accuse Congress of ‘McCarthyism'” by Bob Unruh, on attacks against New York Congressman Peter King for promising to hold hearings on the threat of militant Islam in the U.S.
“The Muslim Brotherhood is our enemy” by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., in which the former Reagan defense official shows how the shadowy group plans to “destroy Western civilization from within”
“The goal: Rule the world – and destroy Israel” by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik of Palestinian Media Watch, who showcase a Brotherhood leader who warns Muslims that failure to perform jihad will lead them to “spiritual death”
“Barack and the Brotherhood” by Pamela Geller, who shows that Obama’s appointments, statements, lawsuits reveal a strong and troubling affinity for Islam
“Obama quietly builds ties with Muslim Brotherhood” by Aaron Klein, on the administration’s back-door talks with a movement vowing the end of the West and the future rule of Islam
“Soros’ fingerprints on Mideast chaos” by Aaron Klein, about the billionaire leftist funding groups opposing America’s allies
“Inside the mind of the Muslim Brotherhood” by Walid Shoebat, whose Arabic translation reveals the true goals of Islamic conspiracy
“‘Moderate civil-rights group’ or sinister terror front?” – an eye-opening look at why one FBI agent calls the Council on American-Islamic Relations “a turnstile for terrorists and their supporters”
“CAIR sues Oklahoma for banning Islamic law” by Drew Zahn, on how the controversial group got a judge to strike down an anti-Shariah measure approved by 70 percent of the state’s voters in November
“The Muslim Brotherhood at CPAC” by Diana West, on “conservative Republican Muslim” Suhail Khan, who asks: “What are our oppressors going to do with a people like us?”
“‘Terror Television’ in the USA” by Cliff Kincaid, on why Al-Jazeera is being called “the Muslim Brotherhood channel”
“Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood romance” by Jamie Glazov, on why leftists like Obama are mysteriously attracted to tyranny and terror
“Most people didn’t take Hitler seriously until it was too late,” said Kupelian. “In the same way, most underestimated the ability of the radical left to subvert America – after all, Reagan won the Cold War. Today, the Islamist threat, right here in America, is real and more advanced than most people comprehend. Terrorism is just the visible tip of the iceberg. ‘KNOW THINE ENEMY’ shows you to the rest of the iceberg.”
Order by phone, call toll-free order line at 1-800-4WND-COM (1-800-496-3266).
WHISTLEBLOWER Magazine published by WorldNetDaily
Jewish Students Under Assault — Part I
Redacted from article by Jonathan Rosenblum
April 1, 2011
Video to follow: Muslim Student Confronts David Horowitz at University of California San Diego
Jewish college students find themselves increasingly under attack on campuses around the world. The seventh annual Israel Apartheid Week just took place on 55 campuses world-wide. Canada’s Immigration Minister Jason Kenney rightly described such events seeking to “promote Palestinian human rights” as “accompanied by anti-Semitic harassment, intimidation and bullying.” Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper lamented that the “anti-Israel mob” is frequently “allowed to prevail.” And opposition leader, Michael Ignatieff described the anti-Israel events as a “cocktail of ignorance and intolerance.” At Ottawa’s Carlton University, a non-Jewish supporter of Israel and his Israeli roommate were surrounded and then chased by an Arabic-speaking mob, one of whose members swung a machete that missed the head of the non-Jew by inches.
The demonization of Israel to which young Jews are exposed begins long before university studies; the campuses are merely the venue for the most intense exposure. British journalist Melanie Phillips described on Israel TV this week the “demonization, dehumanization, and delegitimization” of Israeli Jews that has become the daily fare of the mainstream British media, and which she documents in nauseating detail in her new book The World Turned Upside Down.
James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, explained on Jordanian TV already in 1990, how a powerful Arab Lobby could conquer the campuses and media by allying the Palestinians with the American Left – ’60s radicals now tenured professors, African-American student groups, and, above all, Jewish progressives. Vast sums of Arab oil money have been used to advance the process. Over the last ten years, 600 million dollars in Arab money has flowed to American universities — most to the elite universities, where the next generation of American leaders are trained — to fund Middle East Studies programs, for which excoriation of Israel is always the soup du jour.
The recent resignation of the head of the prestigious London School of Economics over the receipt of very large donation from Libya, and the granting of a spurious PhD. to Muammar Gaddafi’s son Seif in return, is an example of the same Arab largesse with strings attached in England.
The Jewish progressives have certainly filled their assigned role. Thirty professors of Jewish studies recently signed a petition asking Orange County, Calif. prosecutors to drop charges against Arab students who conspired to prevent Israel’s ambassador to the United States Michael Oren from speaking at University of California at Irvine.
Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser, co-founders of the David Project to combat the anti-Israel tenor of American universities, describe the success of Zogby’s project: Radical professors express the dominant narrative that Israel is a racist, genocidal nation. “Outside the classroom anti-Israel groups hold conferences, screen films and conduct theatrical demonstrations that portray Israel in the harshest terms. Israel’ advocates are prevented from speaking; pro-Israel events are disrupted; Jewish students are intimidated verbally or even physically, and are excluded from pro-Palestinian events.
Nor do academics even feel the need to hide their visceral distaste for Jews, not just Israelis. Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz just returned from Norway, where none of the country’s three leading universities would agree to sponsor a lecture by him on Israel and International Law, offered free of charge. The same universities have hosted speeches by prominent academic proponents of BDS (boycotts, divestment and sanctions) against Israel, such as Ilan Pappe. The framer of one Norwegian academic boycott petition began with an explicit reference to Jews’ – even secular Jews’ — “self-satisfied [and] self-centered tribal mentality.”
ON THE UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES, there will always be a hard-core group of students whose identity is strengthened by the sense of being a minority under siege, but for most the effect is just the opposite. Even those with the strongest Jewish identity become apologetic, if not absolutely cowed, when the subject of Israel arises.
Communications guru Frank Luntz recently described to the Jerusalem Post’s David Horowitz a focus group he did with 35 Harvard and MIT students, 20 non-Jewish and 15 Jewish. Within ten minutes, the non-Jewish students had started talking about “Israeli war crimes,” “the Israel Lobby,” “Jewish power.” And all the while the Jewish students just sat there as if struck dumb. It took a full 49 minutes, until the head of the Harvard Israel Action group tried to answer. After three hours, Luntz dismissed the non-Jewish students and berated some of the brightest Jewish students in America for having being unwilling or incapable of responding.
By way of partial explanation, Luntz suggested that the Jewish students have been raised by parents for whom tolerance and being non-judgmental are the supreme values – particularly the vast majority of Jewish students from left-wing background, As a consequence, they are uncomfortable standing up for Israel against Palestinian claims.
The failure to provide Jewish university students with more tools to defend themselves constitutes one of the great failures of organized Jewry in both the United States and Great Britain. But the explanation is not hard to find. In their ambivalence towards Israel, Jewish students merely reflect the ambivalence of the larger community, including many in leadership positions in organized Jewish life.
By Kathleen Parker
The Washington Post
April 4, 2010
NEW YORK — Whether the topic is Libya’s rebels or Afghanistan’s “reconciliation” with the Taliban, the pivotal question is, or should be: What about the women?
During my brief tenure as a CNN anchor, I insistently raised this question and was consistently disappointed by the answer, which more or less, went like this: “Yes, well, the women. Too bad about the women. They’ll suffer.”
Women, and by extension children, are what too many have come to accept as “collateral damage” in theaters of war. We hate it, of course, but what can one do? It isn’t in our strategic interest to save the women and children of the world. Or, as an anonymous senior White House official recently told The Washington Post: “Gender issues are going to have to take a back seat to other priorities. There’s no way we can be successful if we maintain every special interest and pet project. All those pet rocks in our rucksack were taking us down.”
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, no stranger to the importance of advancing women’s rights, promptly refuted the comment. Even so, the anonymous spokesman’s opinion, though inartfully expressed, is hardly isolated. But what if this is a false premise? What if saving women from cultures that treat them as chattel was in our strategic and not just moral interest? What if helping women become equal members of a society was the most reliable route to our own security?
One needn’t be a visionary to accept this simple tenet as not only probable but inescapably true. Without exception, every nation that oppresses women is a failed and, therefore, dangerous nation. This is not the stuff of stunning revelation, but it is often overlooked or minimized in importance. More typically pressing are armies and artillery. The real fight is in the trenches where men historically have clashed to resolve their differences.
Ironically perhaps to those still waiting for the oceans to recede and the planet to heal, President George W. Bush and Laura Bush always understood the necessity of including women in the peace equation. Hence, the historic U.S.- Afghan Women’s Council established in 2002 by Bush and Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
At a conference last week held by the former first couple — “Building Afghanistan’s Future: Promoting Women’s Freedom and Advancing Their Economic Opportunity” — the Bushes reiterated their commitment to the women of Afghanistan and their belief that protecting women should be at the core of our foreign policy.
“We liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban, because of providing a safe haven for al-Qaida,” George Bush told Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren. “I believed then and believe now we have an obligation to help this young democracy in Afghanistan survive — and thrive. And one of the best and most effective ways to do so is to empower women.”
Such a simple concept – empowering women. Except that in a country where men feel free to throw acid in the faces of little girls trying to attend school, it is not so simple. In a nation where child marriage and “honor killings” are still accepted custom, it is not so easy. No one underestimates the challenges of helping women become equal participants in a civil society only recently concocted. But allowing progress to recede shouldn’t be an option.
Recent negotiations between the Karzai government and the Taliban, in which women’s rights could be diluted, should have all of us worried. It is too bad, meanwhile, that we are restricted in these discussions by terminology that rings of cliché. “Women’s rights” sounds too much like debates about abortion and subsidized day care. What we’re really talking about is basic human rights. The freedom to work, to make decisions about one’s life, to seek an education and to be safe to walk on the streets without a male escort. To be fully human, in other words.
Anything less is terrorism by any other name. The insanity that sends jihadists to rain hell on civilized nations is the same that stones women to death for failing to comport to primitive norms of behavior. As Clinton wrote in Time magazine in 2001, “The mistreatment of women in Afghanistan was like an early warning signal of the kind of terrorism that culminated in the attacks of September 11.”
Women are not collateral damage in the fight for security. They are not pet rocks in a rucksack, nor are they sidebars to the main story. They are the story — and should be the core of our foreign policy strategy in Afghanistan as elsewhere.
The Closing of the Muslim Mind
BY Robert R. Reilly
Video bottom of page, Muslims take over Madison Ave, NYC, NY USA
Redacted from a much more detailed book review
BY DAVID AIKMAN
Weekly Standard April 11, 2011
What happened to Islamic culture?
Why did a civilization that may have produced more books in Muslim Spain alone in the ninth century than existed in the entirety of the rest of Europe subside into a civilizational torpor that is the wonder even of the U.N.? Why do countries of the Arab world always come close to the bottom of a global list that measures things like literacy or schooling for women? Why, in Freedom House’s annual compilation of countries that are “free,” is there not a single Arab country listed?
Why, in 2006 to take a recent example, were there more foreign books translated in one European country, Spain, than were translated in the entire foregoing millennium in the entire Muslim world?
These are hard questions, and they call out for a rational, unemotional answer. Robert R. Reilly comes closer to providing a persuasive explanation than any other account I have seen. As Reilly succinctly shows, Islamic civilization, not just in the Arab world but later in Anatolia, in the Indian subcontinent, and then throughout Southeast Asia, threw out of the intellectual window the principles of rational inquiry that the Greeks had first introduced to the West half a millennium before Christ.
The collective Muslim ulema—theological leaders—decided that it would be too “dangerous” to allow free inquiry—not just of the Koran itself but of the daily reality before our eyes.
The reason, as Reilly makes clear, was a theological controversy within Islam. Formalized Islamic doctrine holds that the Koran existed from all eternity with Allah, and that it was only when the Angel Gabriel revealed its contents to Muhammad that the world was able to hear, through the Koran, what Allah was saying.
The Asharites (an early Muslim think tank) would have constituted a serious blockage to Islam’s philosophical development, but even they were topped by a Muslim theologian who nailed down the hatch on the use of reason even more tightly than the Asharites. He was Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058-1111), one of Islam’s most influential thinkers. Al-Ghazali vehemently rejected Plato and Aristotle in The Incoherence of the Philosophers and insisted that, in nature, there was no such thing as cause and effect. To question this, subsequent Islamic jurists averred, was to commit blasphemy by implying that there were limits on Allah’s power and authority.
One tragic consequence of this mode of thinking was the complete withering on the vine within Islam of the spirit of scientific inquiry. Reilly quotes a prominent Pakistani scientist, Pervez Hoodbhoy, on this subject:
Science in the Islamic world essentially collapsed. No major invention or discovery has emerged from the Muslim world for over seven centuries now. That arrested scientific development is one important element—although by no means the only one—that contributes to the present marginalization of Muslims and a growing sense of injustice and victimhood.
The absence within Islam of any ontological basis for belief in the equality of human beings is what led to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, signed in the Egyptian capital by 45 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference in 1990. The U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that such rights apply to the entire human race, without exception. The Cairo declaration added the chilling stipulation that all rights mentioned in the Universal Declaration were subject to Islamic sharia: In other words, they were null and void.
Islamism, or the transformation of the Islamic faith into a political ideology, is the end result of the refusal to apply reason to either scientific or political problems.
David Aikman is the author, most recently, of The Mirage of Peace: Understanding the Never-Ending Conflict in the Middle East.
The American People Stand with Israel
But, unlikely, the present American administration
By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger
March 11, 2011
(Glenn Beck Video at end of this article)
At the end of 1989, Israel’s top Foreign Office bureaucrats argued that Israel was, ostensibly, losing ground in the USA, due to the end of the Cold War, a supposed New World Order and Prime Minister Shamir’s dismissal of “land-for-peace.” Therefore, they proposed that, in order to secure relations with the US, Israel should cede land to the Palestinians.
However, their assumptions were resoundingly refuted. Israel’s strategic posture was upgraded as a derivative of the New World Disorder and a series of mutual threats, such as Islamic terrorism, Iran, ballistic missiles, rogue Arab regimes, exacerbated Middle East volatility, violence and uncertainty. US-Israel strategic cooperation expanded significantly, in spite of deep disagreements over the Palestinian issue and in defiance of President Bush and Secretary of State Baker.
In 2011, despite the 1989 lessons and the 2011 seismic upheaval in Arab countries, Jerusalem again considers ceding land to the Palestinians, in order to sustain strategic cooperation with the USA, under the false assumptions that US-Israel relations evolve around the Palestinian issue, that Israel-in-retreat is respected by Americans, and that Israel’s strategic standing in the US is undergoing erosion.
Thus, Gallup’s annual (February 2011) poll on American attitudes toward foreign countries highlights Israel as a favorite American ally. Israel (68%) ranks among the seven most popular countries, which include Canada, Britain, Germany, Japan, India and France, ahead of South Korea and dramatically ahead of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt (37%, 50% and 40% respectively). The Palestinian Authority (19%) is at the bottom of the list, along with Iran and North Korea.
Currently, Israel benefits from a public opinion tailwind, merely one percent behind its 1991 all time record popularity. Israel’s image as a credible, reliable, capable, stable, democratic, non-conditional ally of the USA is bolstered against the backdrop of the current turmoil in Arab lands, which clarify that the Palestinian issue is not the core cause of the Middle East turbulence, is not the crown jewel of Arab policy-making and is not favored by the American People and Congress.
Anyone claiming that Israel is losing ground in the USA, and that in order to rebound Israel must introduce more concessions to the Arabs, is either dramatically mistaken, outrageously misleading or seeking an alibi for vacillation in face of pressure by a relatively weak American president.
A positive image of the Jewish State, and a negative image of Arab countries, has dominated the state of mind of the American constituency, which is the key axis of the US political system, holding an effective stick over the head of American legislators and presidents.
According to the February 25, 2011 Rasmussen Report, one of the top three US pollsters, most constituents would stop foreign aid to Arab countries, but support foreign aid to the Jewish State. 61% do not expect the current Middle East upheaval to advance democracy or peace in Arab countries.
The most realistic expression of Israel’s robust standing in the US is reflected by the most authentic representatives of the American People: the Legislature. Congress is equal in power to the Executive, representing the attitudes of the American constituent on domestic, external and national security issues. Hence, 75% of the 435 House Representatives and 80% of the 100 Senators – Republicans and Democrats alike, tend to support the Jewish State through legislation and resolutions, sometimes in defiance of the White House.
The gap between the world view of President Obama and most constituents was exposed in November 2010, when Democrats suffered – due to Obama’s plummeting popularity – the most devastating political defeat since World War 2. That gap also reflects the attitude toward Israel, which constitutes a rare bi-partisan common denominator, earning a higher level of support (68%) than Obama (47%).
The American constituent does not consider the Jewish State a conventional foreign policy issue, but also a domestic issue, closely identified with the moral Judeo-Christian foundations of the USA. Moreover, unlike Obama, most constituents regard President Reagan as a role model of values and view the Jewish State as the “Ronald Reagan of the Middle East,” representing their basic values: respect toward religion and tradition, patriotism, security-oriented, anti-UN, anti-terrorism and suspicion toward Arab and Muslim regimes.
The solid foundation of shared US-Israel values, the recent volcanic eruptions in the Middle East and Israel’s strategic capabilities and reliability have transformed the US into a sustained bastion of support of the Jewish State, notwithstanding problematic attitudes by some presidents, criticism by the “elite” media and hostility toward Israel on some US campuses.
This is not the time for vacillation and painful concessions; this is the time to enhance US-Israel strategic relations and demonstrate pain-killing steadfastness.
Video at end of article, please view, Wake up America
By Pat Condell
The Washington Times
It is not every day that Congress breaks a major taboo and, in so doing, performs a real service to the nation. Thursday, however, was one such day when Rep. Peter King, New York Republican, demonstrated impressive leadership in conducting a four-hour hearing on “extremism” in the American Muslim community.
For his efforts, the Homeland Security Committee’s chairman was subjected to tremendous personal attacks and partisan sniping – the wages of taboo-busting.
While those responsible for inflicting such slanderous criticism claim, in the words of one group, to have “defeat[ed] a major threat of Islamophobia,” the real story is that Mr. King began a conversation about an issue that has long been deemed politically untouchable. He also established that there is, indeed, a problem of “extremism” within the American Muslim community.
One manifestation of that problem was the determined effort made by the so-called “leadership” of the Muslim population in this country, not only to impugn the chairman and several of his witnesses but to suppress these hearings altogether. For example, groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) lined up 55 House Democrats to insist that Mr. King “reconsider the scope of these hearings and instead examine all forms of violence motivated by extremist beliefs, rather than unfairly focusing on just one religious group.”
One of the reasons for this demand became clear as witnesses shed light on the true nature of such self-appointed Muslim leaders: They do not speak for American Muslims and are either directly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood – an organization whose mission is to “destroy Western civilization from within” – or sympathetic to its goal of bringing Shariah to the United States.
Relatives of two young men who were recruited, indoctrinated and sent to engage in jihad provided frightening insights into the ways in which Muslim organizations, mosques, cultural centers and Islamic societies stealthily advance this objective. One means is via dawa – the proselytization of the politico-military-legal doctrine of Shariah.
Particularly chilling was the account of a Somali-American living in Minnesota by the name of Abdirizak Bihi. His nephew, Burhan Hassan, was among those killed while fighting on behalf of the Islamist terrorist group al-Shabab in Somalia. He relayed how his family was warned by community “leaders” not to go to the authorities for help lest they wind up in Guantanamo Bay or face “eternal fire and hell.”
Was this an isolated incident? Hardly. At least since the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, prominent Muslim American organizations have encouraged their co-religionists not to cooperate with law enforcement. Among the most recent examples was a message on a CAIR website calling on its members to “Build a wall of resistance. Don’t talk to the FBI.”
Of course, this narrative contrasts sharply with that promoted by the Muslim Public Affairs Council and its ilk, who take credit for successfully inseminating into the U.S. media the notion that they are actively “engaging” with law enforcement. Notably, MPAC takes credit for getting Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca called to testify at the King hearing for the purpose of attesting to their good citizenship.
Unfortunately for both the officer sporting a uniform with five stars and his Islamist friends, freshman Rep. Chip Cravaak, Minnesota Republican, asked whether the sheriff was aware of CAIR’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood’s franchise in Palestine, known as Hamas. The sheriff professed to know nothing of those associations. When Mr. Cravaak pointed out that the Department of Justice has demonstrated in federal court that such ties do exist, Sheriff Baca demurred and simply said that if there is that evidence, then such individuals and organizations ought to be prosecuted.
Well, no kidding. They certainly should be prosecuted. And here is a question that future hearings of the Homeland Security Committee should address: Why hasn’t CAIR been prosecuted for being tied to Hamas, for working on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood and, specifically, for fostering the efforts to bring Shariah to America?
After all, Shariah is a seditious ideology and totalitarian program explicitly designed to hollow out – and ultimately destroy – representative government and the civil liberties that are enshrined in our Constitution. There is every reason for such a prosecution to go forward, and we need to know why has not it happened to date.
There was one other evident reason why the Muslim Brotherhood’s front groups were so determined to shut down the King hearing and excoriate the chairman for having as witnesses anybody other than its hand-picked candidates – the blubbering first-Muslim-in-Congress Rep. Keith Ellison, Minnesota Democrat, and the clueless Sheriff Baca. Rep. King helped credential Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a former naval officer and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, as a credible and inspiring voice for pro-American Muslims and Islamic reform.
We owe Mr. King a debt of gratitude for defying those who would have shut him up and shut his hearings down. In so doing, he has laid bare important truths about the threat posed by Shariah and its adherents, empowered those such as Dr. Jasser who are courageously standing up against it, and broken a taboo in a way that cries out for many more hearings on these subjects by his committee and others.
Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy (SecureFreedom.org), a columnist for The Washington Times and host of Secure Freedom Radio, heard in Washington weeknights at 9 p.m. on WRC-AM (1260).
Redacted from a letter sent by Edward Cousar
Executive Director, Black Republican PAC
(Video at end of article, Losing our Sons)
Dear Fellow American,
If you think there’s nothing in the world that will convince black Americans to vote Republican…then throw this letter away right now. You are part of the problem! But if you realize that the slow motion train wreck of the current White House occupant is giving us an unprecedented opportunity to reach out to black voters, then I humbly request your undivided attention for the next five minutes.
First, please let me introduce myself. My name is Edward Cousar and I’m the executive director of Black Republican PAC. And I’m dedicated to spreading the Republican message of low taxes, family values, better education, free enterprise, and economic opportunity throughout the black community. Many black Americans 1 know already share these values. Yet even though their values are already Republican values, they’ve never thought twice about voting for a Republican. And let’s face the hard facts. Electing the first black president in 2008 was a historic moment that many in the black community longed to see. As a result, the votes of black America supplied the crucial margin of victory for Barack Obama on Election Day. But now reality is hitting black America.
Throughout his campaign Obama promised to restore the economy when he had no idea how to do that, ran as a moderate when in truth he was a far-left radical, and claimed he would heal old racial wounds. He’s failed on every count. And now disappointment and disillusionment with “the One” are setting into the black community. In fact, Obama’s policies have been especially disastrous for black Americans — even more so than white Americans.
Just consider how the recession and Obama’s failed “stimulus” and economic program have hurt the black community. Overall, under Barack Obama’s term, the black unemployment rate is 5 points higher than the average for the country. And 16-to-24-year olds have been devastated by the recession — 48% of these young black Americans are unemployed compared to 20% of white Americans of the same age. Under Obama, America may be in a recession, but black America is in a DEPRESSION. There’s only so long that Obama’s silver tongue can gloss over the fundamental failing of his policies. And a black man or woman without a job is not going to vote for a president or his party that promises more of the same failed policies no matter what the color of his skin.
This is why we Republicans have an opportunity to reach out to black Americans and show them the superiority of our Republican ideas and policies. Obama is messing up so royally we have a chance to bring large chucks of black America inside our big tent. We were the party of black America before. Until Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, most blacks favored the Republican Party because it was the party that freed the slaves and then helped the black community after the Civil War. And even as late as 1960, Richard Nixon won 32% of the black vote.
Yet in the last 50 years no Republican candidate for president has gotten more than 15% of the black vote. As a result, the Democratic Party has had a lock on the black community on Election Day. But the floundering presidency of Obama and the misbegotten policies of the Democrats are causing the black community to realize that it has gotten a raw deal.
For starters, many blacks are increasingly disturbed at the radical positions of the Democrats — support of gay marriage, hostility to religion, backing of failed socialist economic policies even after they destroyed the black family and many once vibrant black urban communities. Black Americans are realizing that the Democratic Party is not their ticket to a better life. But just because the black community is disappointed in the Democratic Party doesn’t mean they will vote for Republicans.
Republicans need to extend a welcoming hand. The biggest problem that the Republican Party faces is that we have few credible voices working inside the black community to make our arguments. That’s why BLACK REPUBLICAN PAC is the best weapon to take on the Democratic Party machine in decades. BLACK REPUBLICAN PAC’s mission is to cultivate up and coming black Republican leaders and recruit black voters. Because if we can show just 25% of black voters that the Republican Party offers better solutions than the Democrats, we can break the back of the Democrat Party.
We have a proven strategy for bringing black Americans back to the party of Lincoln. As a lifelong Republican who also happens to be black, I know that I can communicate our Republicans ideals to the black community better than anyone else. Quite frankly, black Republicans can go places and say things in the black community where it is impossible for other Republicans to get a hearing.
That’s why BLACK REPUBLICAN PAC provides resources for these natural community leaders to make the case for Republican ideals from within the black community. Black Republicans will carry the Republican Party message of hope and economic empowerment through strong families, education, and ownership of homes and small businesses. And as a black-led organization. Black Republican PAC can get its foot in many doors that the Republican Party has a hard time even getting opened.
I would not write this letter if I didn’t have untold numbers of enthusiastic black leaders and candidates coming to me asking me to give them the tools they need to get the job done. They’re-ready to spread the Republican Party’s message of family, faith, education, and economic opportunity back to the black community… But they can only do it if they have the tools. So I need to ask you today — will you help me stop Obama’s far left agenda by peeling off just 25% of black voters from the Democrats’ coalition?
Your urgent donation of $35, $50, $75, $100, $250, $500, $1,000 or more will help me equip black leaders and candidates today to go out and spread our Republican message tomorrow. Obama is stumbling. His economic policies are destroying the black community and sending unemployment skyrocketing. This is a golden opportunity for us to reach out to black voters and cripple Obama’s political base.
The iron grip of the Democratic Party on black voters will only be loosened when we Republicans go to the black community and unabashedly make our case.
Edward Cousar, Executive Director
Please send checks to: Black Republican PAC
PO Box 96613, Washington, DC 20090-6613
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) mourns the passing of legendary American actress and ardent Zionist, Elizabeth Taylor, who has passed away, aged 79. Ms. Taylor, who enjoyed a long and hugely successful career in Hollywood, was converted to Judaism in 1959 by the Rabbi Max Nussbaum, who served as National President of the ZOA from 1964 to 1966.
Among Elizabeth Taylor’s outstanding work on behalf of Israel and Jewish causes was her participating in raising $840,000 for Israel in a 1967 London gala and purchasing personally $100,000 in Israel Bonds in 1959. The same year, she cancelled a visit to Moscow after the Soviet Union lashed out at Israel after the June 1967 Six Day War.
In 1975, she was one of 60 prominent women to sign a statement to then-U.N. Secretary General Kurt Waldheim, condemning the U.N. General Assembly’s infamous Zionism-is-Racism resolution. Taylor offered herself as a hostage when 104 hostages aboard an Air France airbus were hijacked by PLO terrorists and held at Uganda’s Entebbe Airport, from which they rescued in a spectacular Israeli commando mission on July 4, 1976, America’s 200th birthday.
Taylor frequently visited Israel and met with its leadership, including Prime Minister Menachem Begin in 1983. In 1987, she signed a petition seeking the release from Soviet incarceration of leading refusenik, Ida Nudel.
Elizabeth Taylor’s pro-Israel activism led to the banning of her films in several Arab countries. After purchasing $100,000 in Israel Bonds in 1959, the United Arab Republic (now Egypt) banned all her movies. Gen. Essam Elmasri, head of the Cairo regional bureau of the Israel Boycott Office, said that Miss Taylor would not be allowed to come to Egypt because she has adopted the Jewish faith and “supports Israeli causes.” Her movie, Cleopatra, was not permitted to be filmed in Egypt, but in 1964, Egypt dropped her from its blacklist when it decided that Cleopatra, which mentions Egypt 122 times, would be provide good publicity for Egypt (Ami Eden, ‘In the JTA Archive: Liz Taylor says trade me for Entebbe hostages,’ Jewish Telegraphic Agency, March 23, 2011).
ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, “Elizabeth Taylor was not only a wonderful actress but a wonderful Zionist. In the days of vicious Arab boycotts stronger than those today, she could have taken a self-interested line, as have many Jewish actors today, and failed to speak up or support Israel or, worse, engaged in anti-Israel slanders and other activities that harm Israel and aid its enemies, but she didn’t.
The ZOA is proud of its connection to Elizabeth Taylor and expresses heartfelt condolences to her family and friends at her passing. Her rabbi was Rabbi Max Nussbaum, of Temple Israel, Hollywood, who was also a past National President of ZOA. Members of Temple Israel included Al Jolson, Sammy Davis, Jr., Eddie Fisher, Eddie Cantor, George Jessel and Leonard Nimoy, among numerous other Hollywood celebrities. ”
May her soul rest in peace.
And, many thanks to Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs for posting this fantastic video summary of Liz’s movie career. Here is the url link. I hope it comes up for you or try and paste the link on your own search engine. (jsk)