Dinesh D’Souza to debate Obama mentor Communist bomber Wm. Ayers on your computer, Jan 30 7:30 PM

II A Message from 2016 Co-Producer Gerald Molen

Dinesh D’Souza to debate Obama mentor Communist bomber Wm. Ayers on your computer, Jan 30 7:30 PM

January 21, 2014

Dear Friends,

Next Thursday, January 30, 2014, 7:30 PM I am going head-to-head with Bill Ayers on the campus of Dartmouth, my alma mater, on the topic “What’s So Great About America?”

You and I both know that there are many things that make America exceptionalism, but progressives like Ayers don’t like to admit it. In fact, if they had their way, American exceptional would be reduced to the point where we are just another small country in a world with no American influence. Next Thursday, I hope to set the record straight: America affords opportunities that are unmatched by every other country on the planet.

I hope you’ll tune in to see the action. I’ve set up a free livestream on my website just for my fans, and it’s my hope that we can have as much energy and excitement about American exceptionalism online as we will in the auditorium at Dartmouth next week. You can watch live right here, and we’ll send you out a reminder to tune in next Thursday.

In the meantime, you can forward this email to all of your friends so they can sign up to get a reminder to watch next Thursday too. All they have to do is click here. You can also help me out by tweeting about the upcoming debate!

Sincerely,

Dinesh D’Souza

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/ Try to view debate here Thurs Jan 30 7:30 PM

Published Books:
• Obama’s America
• Godforsaken
• The Roots of Obama’s Rage
• Life After Death
• What’s So Great About Christianity
• The Enemy At Home
• Letters to a Young Conservative
• What’s So Great About America
• The Virtue of Prosperity
• Ronald Reagan
• The End of Racism
• Illiberal Education

Every year, I speak more than 50 times to businesses, churches, universities, and other groups about America, Christianity, Politics, and Apologetics. I’ve debated some of the leading thinkers including Peter Singer and the late Christopher Hitchens. To find out more or invite me to speak to your group visit my Speaking page.

Dinesh D’Souza
1140 Wall Street, #2157
La Jolla, CA 92038

message:%3C17.7E.29152.0C11FD25@ec2%3E

II A Message from 2016 Co-Producer Gerald Molen

Dear Friends of Dinesh,

In America, we have a long tradition of not doing what is commonly done in too many other countries — criminalizing dissent through the selective enforcement of the law. But that has seemingly changed in Obama’s America.

Yesterday, I explained the politcally-motivated events that led to Dinesh’s indictment on campaign-finance charges to the Hollywood Reporter. In the same article, I explained that the Feds have chosen to pursue this alleged minor violation in the same way the IRS targeted conservative Tea Party groups for retribution. In light of the way the IRS has been used to stifle dissent, this arrest should send shivers down the spines of all freedom-loving Americans.

Our production team for America has issued the following statement: “We believe this is an unfortunate misunderstanding arising out of Dinesh D’Souza’s desire to help the uphill campaign of a friend. There was no intent to do anything illegal or corrupt in any way. This will have no impact on the film “America” which will be released on the Fourth of July this year as previously announced. Filming is on schedule and D’Souza will continue to lead the enterprise.”

Neither the filmmakers nor the American public can allow this prosecution to deter us from the film’s release, and I am calling upon the American people to show their elected officials that this kind of selective prosecution will not stand by joining us at the box office.

I look forward to my good friend Dinesh being vindicated as we hold federal authorities accountable to enforce the law equally and without mind to their personal political agenda. You can leave your support on Dinesh’s Facebook Page and with a #StandWithDinesh tweet.

As one insightful commenter wrote on the article in THR, Obama’s DOJ is out to settle scores.

All my best,
Gerald R. (Jerry) Molen

And… Here comes Hillary, Benghazigate and a short summary of her previous illustrious history

And… Here comes Hillary, Benghazigate and a short summary of her previous illustrious history

THE TRUTH ABOUT HILLARY

By Dick Morris

If you happen to see the Bill Clinton five minute TV ad for Hillary in which he introduces the commercial by saying he wants to share some things we may not know about Hillary’s background.  Beware, as I was there for most of their presidency and know them better than just about anyone, I offer a few corrections:
 
Bill says: “In law school Hillary worked on legal services for the poor.”
 
The facts are: Hillary’s main extra-curricular activity in law school was helping the Black Panthers, on trial in Connecticut for torturing and killing a federal agent.  She went to court every day as part of a law student monitoring committee trying to spot civil rights violations and develop grounds for appeal.
 
Bill says: “Hillary spent a year after graduation working on a children’s rights project for poor kids.”
 
The facts are: Hillary interned with Bob Truehaft, the head of the California Communist Party.   She met Bob when he represented the Panthers and traveled all the way to San Francisco to take an internship with him.
 
Bill says: “Hillary could have written her own job ticket, but she turned down all the lucrative job offers.”
 
The facts are: She flunked the DC bar exam, yes, flunked; it is a matter of record, and only passed the Arkansas bar.  She had no job offers in Arkansas, none, and only got hired by the University of Arkansas Law School at Fayetteville because Bill was already teaching there.  She did not join the prestigious Rose Law Firm until Bill became Arkansas Attorney General and was made a partner only after he was elected Arkansas Governor.
 
Bill says: “President Carter appointed Hillary to the Legal Services Board of Directors, and she became its chairman.”
 
The facts are: The appointment was in exchange for Bill’s support for Carter in his 1980 primary against Ted Kennedy. Hillary then became chairman in a coup in which she won a majority away from Carter’s choice to be chairman.
 

Bill says: “She served on the board of the Arkansas Children’s Hospital.”

The facts are:  Yes she did.  But her main board activity, not mentioned by Bill, was to sit on the Wal-Mart board of directors, for a substantial fee.  She was silent about their labor and health care practices.
 
Bill says: “Hillary didn’t succeed at getting health care for all Americans in 1994, but she kept working at it and helped to create the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that provides five million children with health insurance.”
 
The facts are: Hillary had nothing to do with creating CHIP.  It was included in the budget deal between Clinton and Republican Majority Leader Senator Trent Lott.  I know; I helped to negotiate the deal.  The money came half from the budget deal and half from the Attorney Generals’ tobacco settlement.  Hillary had nothing to do with either source of funds.
 
Bill says: “Hillary was the face of America all over the world.”
 
The facts are: Her visits were part of a program to get her out of town so that Bill would not appear weak by feeding stories that Hillary was running the White House.  Her visits abroad were entirely tourism and symbolic and there was no substantive diplomacy on any of them.
 

Bill says: “Hillary was an excellent Senator who kept fighting for children’s and women’s issues.”
 
The facts are: Other than totally meaningless legislation like changing the names on courthouses and post offices, she has passed only four substantive pieces of legislation.  One set up a national park in Puerto Rico.  A second provided respite care for family members helping their relatives through Alzheimer’s or other conditions.  And two were routine bills to aid 911 victims and responders which were sponsored by the entire NY delegation.
 
( Please remember all of the above when you find yourself in the voting booth in 2016. And, remember which party is most likely to nominate her when you vote for Congress in 2014.) jsk

John Kerry’s misguided obsession with Israel demanding concessions that will result in its extinction. (G-d forbid)

John Kerry’s misguided obsession with Israel demanding concessions that will result in its extinction. (G-d forbid)

Obama Administration Ignores Palestinian Arab Pro-Terror, Anti-Peace Words & Deeds

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) is understanding of Israeli Defense Minister and former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff, General Moshe Ya’alon stating that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is ignoring the realities of continuing Palestinian opposition to Israel’s existence.

General Ya’alon refuted Secretary Kerry’s insistence on the centrality of the conflict to the peace and stability of the Middle East and that it be resolved quickly, saying,

“The American security plan that was presented to us [by Secretary Kerry] is not worth the paper it was written on. It contains neither security nor peace. Only our continued presence in Judea and Samaria and the Jordan River will guarantee that Ben Gurion Airport and (the northern city of) Netanya do not become targets for missiles from every direction … [The PA’s Abbas] lives on our sword. Once we leave Judea and Samaria, he is finished. In fact, throughout the recent months, there is no negotiation between us and the Palestinians –– but rather, between us and the Americans”

The ZOA stated that General Ya’alon’s comments about Secretary Kerry underscores the entire problem to which Mr. Ya’alon was alluding. Consider: the PA’s Abbas can say and do anything and everything –– honor Jew-killing terrorists, demanding they all be released from Israeli prisons; say he’ll never accept a Jewish State; personally protected wanted Jew-killers; tell Palestinians there is no obligation for any Palestinian movement to accept Israel, let alone as a Jewish State, and all the other items we list below –– and attract no criticism or censure from the Obama Administration.

This mirrors the fact that the U.S. has also ignored recent statements by Iranian top leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei addressing a rally of tens of thousands calling for ‘death to America,’ calling the U.S. a ‘great Satan’ and an ‘enemy who smiles,’ and Iranian president Rouhani boasting that the ‘the U.S. and world powers surrendered to the Iranian nation’s will.’ The Obama Administration and Secretary Kerry are silent about all these horrific Palestinian and Iranian actions and words, yet when General Ya’alon points out that Secretary Kerry is being dangerously unrealistic in ignoring the realities facing Israel (and pressuring Israel to make dangerous concessions to the Holocaust-denying Abbas and the PA), the Obama Administration suddenly finds its voice and strongly criticizes the Israeli Defense Minister.

Moreover, given the insistence on negotiations, the consistent ignoring of every infamous Palestinian deed and violation, the Obama Administration seems to be turning itself into the PA’s attorney and chief negotiator while largely ignoring America’s best ally Israel’s serious and legitimate concerns.

The Obama Administration also seems to ignore, or deem irrelevant, the following PA actions and inactions. These actions and inactions prove that the PA has no interest in peace or even statehood, only Israel’s destruction as a Jewish State.

The PA has not fulfilled its 20-year-old, signed obligations under the Oslo agreements to arrest and jail terrorists, outlaw and disband terrorist groups, confiscate illegal weaponry and end the incitement to hatred and murder that suffuses the PA-controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps.

Abbas has a record of continuing pro-terror, and anti-peace words and deeds, including:

Calling and physically embracing Jew-killing terrorists as “heroes”;\

Praising living and dead Jew-killing terrorists

Insisting on a Jew-free future Palestinian State, encompassing the forcible uprooting of nearly 400,000 Jews from Judea/Samaria and eastern half of Jerusalem.

States the PA will never accept Israel as a Jewish State

Always insists that all Palestinian refugees (only about 50,000 still living) and their millions of descendants be allowed to returned to Israel

Declaring that dismantling terror groups is a “red line” that must not be crossed

Stated that the war on Israel will not end even with the creation of a Palestinian State, but rather “internationalize[e] of the conflict as a legal matter, not only a political one … paving the way for us to pursue claims against Israel at the United Nations, human rights treaty bodies and the International Court of Justice

Protecting wanted terrorists in his presidential compound

Naming schools, streets, sports teams and children’s camps after terrorists

Paying stipends to terrorists and their families

The Fatah Constitution (not to be confused with the PLO Charter) was never cancelled and still calls for Israel’s destruction in ten of its clauses, including calling for a “revolution” utilizing terrorism against Israel as an indispensable element in the effort to achieve that goal and also calling for international action to stop Jews from moving to Israel

A PA leader demands that even future Jew-killers arrested by Israel must be released; and

A Fatah emblem showing all Israel labelled ‘Palestine’ and draped in a Palestinian headdress, flanked by a Kalashnikov rifle and an image of arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat.

(Gee whiz! How come Israel does not want to agree to such declarations. Maybe show them to John Kerry?)

II Comment:

Of course, diplomatic protocol and US pressure required General Yaalon to apologize for telling the truth a day later …

Text of Yaalon apology to Kerry January 14, 2014:

“Israel and the United states share a common goal to advance the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians led by Secretary Kerry. We appreciate Secretary Kerry’s many efforts towards that’s end. The defense minister had no intention to cause any offense to the secretary, and he apologizes if the secretary was offended by words attributed to the minister.”

Obama finds another way to destroy our military — unilateral disarmament making us powerless against Russian, Chinese and Iranian aggression

Obama finds another way to destroy our military — unilateral disarmament making us powerless against Russian, Chinese and Iranian aggression

Inside the Ring
Redacted from an article by Bill Gertz
The Washington Times
December 25, 2013

Obama finds another way to destroy our military — unilateral disarmament making us powerless against Russian, Chinese and Iranian aggression

(“It is hard to overstate the dangerous implications of what happened this week when President Obama was caught by an open mic sending a message to Russia’s dictator-in-waiting to wait quietly till after the November elections, after which Mr. Obama could make concessions on America’s national defense.” http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/27/morning-bell-obama-whispers-away-americas-security/)

( Well, he has been keeping his word in spades. Don’t you wish he were keeping his multiple promises to the American people the same way. No Chance!)

The Obama administration has drawn up a plan to shut down one Minuteman III squadron and destroy its 50 in-ground silos by 2017. The rationale behind the plan is said by the administration to be compliance with the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia.

The Pentagon, under the orders of Obama via his defense minister, Chas. Hagel, is facing strong opposition from Congress to an environmental study of Minuteman III missile silos that is needed before 50 land-based strategic missiles can be deactivated under President Obama’s disarmament agenda.

Critics in Congress have said there is no requirement under the treaty to cut land-based strategic missiles.

The Pentagon must conduct an environmental study before launching its plan to dismantle the 50 Minuteman IIIs. A U.S. official said the study would be followed by the removal of the missiles from silos by October, and then destruction of the silos beginning in May 2016.

Current Minuteman III missile fields are located at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyo., Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont., and Minot Air Force Base, N.D.

A bipartisan coalition of eight senators wrote to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last week to urge the Pentagon not to begin the environmental study. It was signed by Sens. Max Baucus, Montana Democrat; Michael B. Enzi, Wyoming Republican; Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican; Jon Tester, Montana Democrat; John Barrasso, Wyoming Republican; John Hoeven, North Dakota Republican; Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota Democrat; and Mary L. Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat.

“Both the Senate and House versions of the fiscal year 2014 defense appropriations bills unambiguously prohibit funding a silo environmental assessment,” the senators said in this Dec. 18 letter. It also was sent to Pentagon Comptroller Robert F. Hale.

“We therefore urge you not to begin such a study before it is clear whether funds will be available to complete it,” the senators said, adding that passage of defense appropriations legislation containing the funding restriction is expected in January.

The senators said that even though the recently passed defense authorization bill allows the Pentagon to begin the silo assessment, “Congress‘ final response to the department’s budget request will come through the fiscal year 2014 appropriations process.”

Critics of the administration plan said destroying the missile silos, instead of just removing the missiles from their silos, could undermine U.S. strategic nuclear deterrence. Strategic analysts say new threats to strategic submarines, or a large-scale buildup of nuclear arsenals by China, Russia or other states could require adding ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to compensate. That option would be lost if the silos are destroyed.

The plan to cut land-based ICBMs was not announced as part of the Pentagon’s April 2010 Nuclear Posture Review. All 450 Minuteman IIIs are being redesigned from three warheads to a single warhead.

Mr. Obama announced in June that he plans to make further cuts in U.S. nuclear warheads from the New START level of 1,550 to about 1,000 warheads.

Russian strategic forces commander Col. Gen. Sergei Karakayev said in a speech Dec. 17 that Moscow plans to keep 1,500 nuclear warheads, a level that would render Mr. Obama’s announced plan for further warhead cuts unilateral disarmament.

Mr. Obama and Mr. Hagel are advocates of eliminating all nuclear weapons.

A Pentagon spokeswoman had no comment.

The far out misinterpretation of Tikkun Olam (Healing the World) by the Jewish Left

The far out misinterpretation of Tikkun Olam (Healing the World) by the Jewish Left

Subject: The Pseudo-Jewish Fetish with “Tikkun Olam”
 
Redacted from a needed epiphany by Professor Steven Plaut
University of Haifa
Haifa Israel
 
 “The central mitzvah or commandment for our era is the mitzvah of Tikkun Olam.   It is the defining mission of Jews to strive for the repair of the world by making society more just, fair, egalitarian, and sensitive.   Judaism demands that we repair the world by striving for social justice.  It is the mission of Jews in the Divine Plan for the universe to repair the world by repairing man, by improving and advancing mankind.”
 
The above paragraph is a fair representation of what has become the defining raison d’être of Judaism as conveyed by non-Orthodox liberal Jewish organizations and synagogues in America.  It is not a direct citation from any, but is an accurate paraphrase of what has become the canon of non-Orthodox Jewish liberalism, in essence the orthodoxy of the non-Orthodox.  It is the “modernized” and contemporary “reinterpretation” of “Jewish ethics” as defined and inculcated by much of the Reform and Conservative movements.

So just what are we to make of the above “Tikkun Olam” proclamation and manifest?
 
The most important thing that must be understood about the Tikkun Olam catechism of non-Orthodox Judaism in the United States is that each and every sentence in the above proclamation is false.

First of all, there is no such thing as a mitzvah or commandment of “Tikkun Olam.”   Jews are nowhere commanded to “repair the world.”  In all the authoritative or traditional compilations of the commandments of Judaism, none list “Tikkun Olam” as one of them. The expression itself does not appear anywhere in the Torah or in the entire Bible.

Those assimilationist liberals who insist that the entire “ethics of the Prophets” can be reduced to the pursuit of “Tikkun Olam” will have to explain why none of the Books of the Prophets use the term. “Tikkun Olam” is used sporadically in the Talmud, but as a technical term for resolution of certain judicial problems that arise before rabbinic courts.  The only place where the expression appears in Jewish prayer is in the “Aleinu” and there it clearly has nothing at all to do with social justice.  In the “Aleinu,” Tikkun Olam is explicitly explained in the prayer text itself as the quest to eliminate pagan superstition and to see God’s rule of the universe implemented. In other words, it is a theological notion, not a social or political or environmental one.  In Judaism, the world does not get repaired by redistribution of income and wealth nor by cutting carbon emissions but by humans subordinating themselves to God’s will.   

Secondly, “Tikkun Olam” does not mean that Jews are obligated to strive to make the earth a more just, clean, fair and equal place.  Nowhere in Judaism are Jews commanded to restructure or re-engineer the societies of the nations.  Jews have a certain obligation to participate in the Jewish community and to assist other Jews, especially Jews living in hardship, including through Tzedaka or charity. Even within the Jewish community, there is no religious imperative or justification for coerced schemes of income or wealth redistribution, aside from payments to the Levites and priests. And while there is no prohibition as such upon Jews using their resources to assist the downtrodden among the non-Jewish nations, there is also no Judaic imperative to do so and such generosity would be considered morally inferior to the assisting of other Jews.
 
The idea that it is somehow the religious duty of Jews to “repair mankind” is not only complete nonsense, but it is a manifestation of the ignorant megalomania of assimilationist Jewish liberals.  The simple fact of the matter is that in actual Judaism, it is none of the business of Jews to fix or repair humanity.  More generally, in Judaism it is the job of Jews to repair the Jews, not to repair the world. 

Non-Jews are not in need of being “repaired” by Jews, at least as long as they observe the seven “Noahide Commandments,” the rules of living that Jews interpret to be conferred upon all humans, all descendants of Noah, by God.  Beyond that, what the gentiles do and how they do it is none of the business of Jews, and Jews simply have no religious standing to interfere.  It is certainly not the job of Jews to instruct non-Jews about matters such as income and wealth distribution, abortion, environmentalism, health care provision, or discrimination. Jews are commanded to speak up only if they witness non-Jews tearing off limbs from live animals and eating them, and in a very small number of other cases.
 
Indeed, the very notion that Jews are so ethically superior that they are entitled to instruct non-Jews in ethnics is completely foreign to the Torah. The self-image of Jews in the Torah/Bible is that of a group of people awash in their own moral failures and foibles, from the Golden Calf to the paganism of the era of the kings of Judah and Israel. The moral imperative of the Torah is for the Jews to improve and reevaluate their own behavior, not to pretend to have the moral superiority to preach to the entire non-Jewish world.
 
Jews are in general not obligated to oppose or reform unjust laws of the nations, at least as long as those laws do not require Jews to bow down to idols. It is the religious moral imperative of Jews to obey the law and that is all.   In democracies in which Jews may vote and express ideological positions, there is no Torah-based objection to their doing so.   But at the same time there are generally no Torah-based ideological positions when it comes to the same policy questions. A Jew is free to favor or oppose Obamacare, shale oil extraction, and Quantitative Easing for any reason he or she sees fit.  It would be a sacrilege and disrespectful to drag the Torah into the debate as the basis for the Jew’s opinion.   The Torah has more important matters on its theological plate.
 
As for the insistence by the “Eco-Judaism” groups that vegetarianism is the highest form of “Tikkun Olam,” the REAL position of the Torah on the subject needs to be mentioned.  The Torah completely prohibits vegetarianism at least once a year, on the evening of Passover, and, while it does not exactly prohibit it for other holidays, eating meat on those holidays is strongly recommended.  As for the recruitment of “Tikkun Olam” as the moral basis for other trendy political positions, some of the clearest ethical positions in all of Judaism are the SUPPORT by the Torah for capital punishment and its strong OPPOSITION to homosexual relations.
  
 The bottom line is that, at the hands of the assimilationist liberals, “Tikkun Olam” has become a nonsense mantra representing nothing more than the replacement of actual Judaism with a pseudo-theology consisting entirely of the pursuit of liberal political fads

Just in case there is any misunderstanding as to Ariel Sharon’s impending obituary

II Video – The Disengagement from Gush Katif (Israeli developed strip of Gaza) with Ariel Sharon

Just in case there is any misunderstanding as to Ariel Sharon’s impending obituary

By David Wilder

January 06, 2014

Ariel Sharon is dying. It’s not considered nice to say bad things about dead people, especially immediately after their passing. So I’m writing this while he’s still alive. Barely. When I heard the news I wasn’t sure if I wanted to laugh or cry. Laugh, that finally, he’s leaving us. Or cry, because his ‘this world’ suffering is coming to an end.

That’s how much I like Ariel Sharon. He had many positions, and many titles. I will remember him as a monster. When elected to the office of Prime Minister in March, 2001, the 2nd Intifada, or what we call the Oslo War, was well underway. Terror attacks, shootings, and the like had begun. In Hebron, Arab terrorists had taken positions on the hills surrounding the Jewish neighborhoods and were shooting at us like ducks in a pond. Great for target practice, but not when the targets are men, women and children, in their homes, cars, or just plain walking down the street.

Sharon could have stopped it. He didn’t. It continued for almost a year and a half, here in Hebron. Only after the Passover Massacre in Netanya and the killing of five year old Danielle Shefi at Adura, just outside of Hebron, did he finally put an end to the nightmare. He was Prime Minister when most of the over 1,500 people murdered during that war. He could have stopped it. He didn’t. But that was just the beginning.

The expulsion from Gush Katif (Jewish communities on the coast of Gaza) and the Northern Shomron, abandoning the southern tip of Israel to Hamas, brought over 13,000 rockets into Israel, into Ashkelon, Ashdod and Tel Aviv – to this very day. Actually, it began with Menachem Began. He set the precedent, with Ariel Sharon as his right-hand man, implementing the expulsions from the Sinai, giving it to the Egyptians after the Yom Kippur War in 1973, There Sharon learned that it is possible to forcibly remove Jews from their homes, destroy Jewish communities and abandon land to our enemy (without the Israeli nation executing him as a traitor.)

What then is the punishment of people who remove cities from Israel, abandoning the land, expelling the people, endangering the population? What happened to them, what was their fate: Begin, the hero of Jewish underground, the leader who destroyed the Iraqi nuclear threat, secluded himself for years following his resignation as Prime Minister, unseen until his dying day.

Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated.

Ehud Olmert, one of the primary initiators of the Gush Katif catastrophe, has undergone numerous trials on charges of corruption, facing disgrace.

Katzav, who as President refused to oppose the Gush Katif expulsion, imprisoned following conviction for rape, from the president’s mansion to a jail cell.

Ariel Sharon, suffering the worst kind of hell, neither here nor there, not dead, not alive, for the past eight years. Some 8,600 people were expelled from the Gush, a year for every thousand people. And one can only image what he will face when trying to enter the pearly gates of heaven.

It is written that there is a ‘place’ somewhere between this world and the next, called in Hebrew “Kaf HaKelah.” This is a kind of nether land — not here, not there. It is written that here, such souls who have so sinned in this world, float around, not being in this world, or the next, a kind of horrible limbo. Usually, for such deserving souls, this aspect of punishment happens following a person’s death. In Sharon’s case, it began here in this world.

There is a story, told now for years, about how a famous Rabbi cursed Ariel Sharon, saying he should receive a blow on his head. People approached the Rabbi and expressed their opposition to this curse. So, the Rabbi then blessed Sharon, saying, ‘he should live a long life.’ It seems that both the ‘curse’ and the ‘blessing’ were achieved.

So what (or who) should this come to teach, what is the lesson for the future? This is what I ask the present Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, as he seems to be negotiating away our land, Eretz Yisrael. Be it Hebron or Shilo, Gitit in the Jordan Valley, or the Arab villages of the ‘Mishulash, on the eastern Sharon plain, bordering Samaria. This is all our land.

It is clear that, at present, there are at least two parallel sets of discussions going on; those led by Justice Minister Tzippy Livni and those being led by Netanyahu himself, seemingly with Abbas, aka Abu Mazen. The US is pushing, but Israel doesn’t necessarily have to budge. That’s up to us; it is up to our Prime Minister, Foreign Minister (who today came out publicly in favor of an agreement), and the Defense Minister. And the others.

What will be in store for them, what will be their fate, should they choose to walk in the footsteps of Ariel Sharon?
It is difficult to fathom their blindness, how and why they reach such depths of absurdity — to even speak of such concessions, of such abandonment, of such expulsions, again.

One thing is very clear: the United States, and in this case, the Secretary of State John Kerry, is pushing very hard, harder than any of his predecessors in recent history. We can only imagine the types of pressure he is applying on Netanyahu. However, it should be known, the word ‘Kerry’ in Hebrew has a distinct meaning: impurity. It is a term utilized to express a tainted uncleanness, almost a defilement, of body and soul. This term quite accurately describes the American SOB. Sometimes, such scum can be contagious. It seems that, in this case, it is starting to rub off on others.

I can only say: Bibi beware. Don’t fall into the potholes left to you by Sharon. And to the others, who can join him, or leave him, can support him or bring him down, your fate is too hanging in the balance. Purify yourselves from the contamination of Kerry. Before Sharon’s miserable fate will almost look good to you.

(David Wilder is a US citizen that emigrated to Israel in 1974. He has been the titular head and spokesperson for the brave Israelis that have chosen to live in Hebron and Kiryat Arba protecting the Cave of Machpelah – the biblical piece of land that Abraham bought from Ephron the Hittite as a burying-place for his wife Sarah at the exorbitant price of four hundred silver shekels. The cave became the family burying-place, Sarah being the first to be buried there; later, Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah, and Jacob, the Patriarchs of the Jewish people, were placed there (Genesis xxiii).

It is the area that PM Netanyahu, in an apparent moment of insanity gave apx 90% over to the Arabs at the tail end of the Oslo Accord agreement in the vain hope that it would bring peace. Peace has not even come close. It has been nothing but another Arab center for terrorism ever since. Now David Wilder rightfully fears that Netanyahu is on the verge of another such gargantuan error giving Arabs more land in Judea and Samaria and allowing them a so-called Palestinian State for which the Arabs have only one goal — the final destruction of the State of Israel.) jsk

II The Disengagement from Gush Katif (Israeli developed strip of Gaza) with Ariel Sharon

From the Great Chas. Krauthammer – Article 1, Chapter 12 of his best seller, Things that Matter

Plus: II The real truth about Palestine and Jesus Christ – Short Video by Member of Knesset Danny Ayalon

From the Great Chas. Krauthammer – Article 1, Chapter 12 of his best seller, Things that Matter

CHAPTER 12

THE JEWISH QUESTION, AGAIN

THOSE TROUBLESOME JEWS

Originally in The Washington Post, June 4, 2010 (and nothing has changed)

The world is outraged at Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Turkey denounces its illegality, inhumanity, barbarity, etc. The usual UN suspects – Third World and European – join in. The Obama administration dithers. But as Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Affairs writes, the blockade is not just perfectly rational, it is perfectly legal.

Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel – a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli territory. Yet, having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent from arming itself with still more rockets.

In World War II, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 crisis, we blockaded (“quarantined”) Cuba. Arms-bearing ships headed to Cuba turned back because the Soviets knew the US Navy would either board them or sink them. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from lethal weaponry

Oh, but weren’t the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No. Otherwise they would have accepted Israel’s offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli port, be inspected for military materiel and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza — as every week 10,000 tons of food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel to Gaza.

Why was the offer refused? Because, as organizer Greta Berlin admitted, the flotilla was not about humanitarian relief but breaking the blockade, i.e., ending Israel’s inspection regime, would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.

Israel has already twice intercepted ships laden with Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that? But even more important, why did Israel even have to blockade? Because blockade is Israel’s fallback as the world systematically de-legitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself — forward and active defense.

(1) Forward defense: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, forward defense—fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.

Where possible (Sinai, for example), Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza, rather than expose Israeli border to Palestinian terror attacks. It is for the same reason America wages a grinding war in Afghanistan: You fight them there, so you don’t have to fight them here.

But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, would bring peace.

Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land — evacuating South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack.

(2) Active defense: Israel then had to switch to active defense — military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat (to borrow President Obama’s description of our campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place.

Worse, the UN Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel’s defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus celebri — the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war — effectively de-legitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terrorist enemies.

(3) Passive defense: Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defenses — a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international de-legitimation. Even the United States is now moving toward having it abolished.

But, if none of these are permissible, what’s left? Ah, but that’s the point. It’s the point understood by the blockade-busting flotilla of useful idiots and terror sympathizers, by the Turkish front organization that funded it, by the automatic anti-Israel Third World chorus at the United Nations, and by the supine Europeans who have had quite enough of the Jewish problem.

What’s left? Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense. Why just last week, the Obama administration joined the jackals and reversed four decades of U.S. practice, by signing on to a consensus document that singles out Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons — thus de-legitimizing Israel’s very last line of defense: deterrence.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide for which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists — Iranian in particular — openly prepare a more final solution.

The Washington Post, June 4, 2010

(And, here we are three and one half years later and Israel’s position is only worse with the same jackals, useful idiots, supine European Union, misdirected enemies John Kerry and Barack Obama yapping at Israel’s heels demanding more concessions that will indeed result in another Final Solution –  Exactly what they all have in mind, Hashem forbid!

Wake up Israel! Do not weaken yourself in any way and give succor to your dedicated, hate-filled enemies. And PM Netanyahu please finally conclude another Arab state two minutes away whose only goal is your destruction should have no place in your considerations.

If they want Israel to disappear let them lose their own lives in huge numbers in the attempt. No more Polish Ghetto, No more Holocaust, No more Willing Executioners without a whole lot of company on the other side. Let them be fully awakened to the reality that Jewish blood is no longer cheap.)

Jerome S. Kaufman, Editor Israel Commentary, www.israel-commentary.org

II The real truth about Palestine and Jesus Christ

By Member of Knesset Danny Ayalon

Israel’s impending raid on Iran’s Nuclear Facilities

Israel’s impending raid on Iran’s Nuclear Facilities

Redacted from: A Raid on Iran

BY URI SADOT
The Weekly Standard
DEC 30, 2013

As world powers debate what a comprehensive nuclear deal with Iran should look like, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to maintain that Israel is not bound by the interim agreement that the P5+1 and Iran struck in Geneva on November 24. Israel, says Netanyahu, “has the right and the obligation to defend itself.” One question then is whether Netanyahu actually intends to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. The other question, no less important, is whether Israel could really pull it off.

American analysts are divided on Israel’s ability to take effective military action. However, history shows that Israel’s military capabilities are typically underestimated. The Israel Defense Forces keep finding creative ways to deceive and cripple their targets by leveraging their qualitative advantages in manners that confound not only skeptical observers but also, and more important, Israel’s enemies.

Military triumphs like the Six-Day War of June 1967 and the 1976 raid on Entebbe that freed 101 hostages are popular Israeli lore for good reason—these “miraculous” victories were the result of assiduously planned, rehearsed, and well-executed military operations based on the elements of surprise, deception, and innovation, core tenets of Israeli military thinking. Inscribed on one of the walls of the IDF’s officer training academy is the verse from Proverbs 24:6: “For by clever deception thou shalt wage war.” And this has been the principle driving almost all of Israel’s most successful campaigns, like the 1981 bombing of Iraq’s nuclear reactor, the 1982 Beka’a Valley air battle, and the 2007 raid on Syria’s plutonium reactor, all of which were thought improbable, if not impossible, until Israel made them reality.

And yet in spite of Israel’s record, some American experts remain skeptical about Israel’s ability to do anything about Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities. Even the most optimistic assessments argue that Israel can only delay the inevitable. As a September 2012 report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies contends: “Israel does not have the capability to carry out preventive strikes that could do more than delay Iran’s efforts for a year or two.” (Excuse me. What’s the matter with that? This is an existential problem for Israel)

Part of the reason that Israeli and American assessments diverge is the difference in the two countries’ recent military histories and political cultures. While the American debate often touches on the limits of military power and its ability to secure U.S. interests around the globe, the Israeli debate is narrower, befitting the role of a regional actor rather than a superpower, and focuses solely on Israel’s ability to provide for the security of its citizens at home.

Any account of surprise and deception as key elements in Israeli military history has to start with the aerial attack that earned Israel total air supremacy over its adversaries in the June 1967 war. Facing the combined Arab armies, most prominently those of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, Israel’s Air Force was outnumbered by a ratio of 3 planes to 1. Nonetheless, at the very outset of the war, the IAF dispatched its jets at a time when Egyptian pilots were known to be having breakfast. Israeli pilots targeted the enemy’s warplanes on their runways, and in two subsequent waves of sorties, destroyed the remainder of the Egyptian Air Force, as well as Jordan’s and most of Syria’s. Within six hours, over 400 Arab planes, virtually all of the enemy’s aircraft, were in flames, with Israel losing only 19 planes.

The 1981 raid on Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak is another example of Israel’s ability to pull off operations that others think it can’t. The success caught experts by surprise because every assessment calculated that the target was out of the flight range of Israel’s newly arrived F-16s. Washington later learned that Israel’s success came from simple and creative field improvisations that gave the Israeli jets the extra mileage needed to safely reach Baghdad and return, and also to gain the element of surprise by extending their reach beyond what the tables and charts that guided thinking in Washington and elsewhere had assumed possible.

Surprise won Israel a similar advantage one year later in the opening maneuvers of the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. For students of aerial warfare, the Beka’a Valley air battle is perhaps Israel’s greatest military maneuver, even surpassing the June 1967 campaign. On June 9, Israel destroyed the entire Soviet-built Syrian aerial array in a matter of hours. Ninety Syrian MiGs were downed and 17 of 19 surface-to-air missile batteries were put out of commission, while the Israeli Air Force suffered no losses.

The 1982 air battle was the culmination of several years’ worth of tension on Israel’s northern border. Israel was concerned that Syria’s deployment of advanced aerial defense systems in Lebanon’s Beka’a Valley would limit its freedom to operate against PLO attacks from Lebanon. When Syria refused to pull back its defenses and U.S. mediation efforts failed, Israel planned for action. Although Israel was widely understood to enjoy a qualitative advantage, no one could have imagined the knockout blow it was about to deliver. When Syrian pilots scrambled for their planes, their communications had already been severed and their radars blinded. Israeli pilots later noted the “admirable bravery” of their Syrian counterparts, whom they downed at a ratio of 90 to 0.

And then there is Israel’s most recent high-profile conflict with Syria. When Israeli intelligence discovered that Bashar al-Assad’s regime was building a plutonium reactor in the northeast Syrian Desert, Israeli and American leaders disagreed on the best course of action. Israel’s then-prime minister Ehud Olmert argued for a military solution, while the Bush administration feared the risks, demurred, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pushed to take the matter to the U.N. (That would have been a big help — almost as big as John Kerry’s and Tzippi Livni’s current recommendations in the latest “peace proposal”) The Israelis, however, confident in their cyberwarfare capabilities, knew they could disable Syria’s air defenses. And on September 6, 2007, Israel once again overturned the expert predictions and assessments of others and successfully destroyed the Syrian reactor at Al Kibar.

The question of how exactly Israel might act to stop the Iranian nuclear program is an open one. …What is certain, however—what many historical precedents make clear—is that it would be an error of the first order to dismiss Israel’s ability to take meaningful military action against Iran. Israel has left its enemies, as well as American policymakers and military experts, surprised in the past, and it may very well do so again. (And, let us say, Amen)

Uri Sadot is a research associate at the Council on Foreign Relations and holds a master’s degree in international affairs from Princeton University.

PM Netanyahu addresses the double crime of Iran, Lebanon, Hezbollah

PM Netanyahu addresses the double crime of Iran, Lebanon, Hezbollah

At the weekly Israeli Government Cabinet meeting today (Sunday, 29 December 2013):

1. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made the following remarks:

“Today, the IDF responded quickly and forcefully to the rocket fire from Lebanon. This is our policy regarding Lebanon just as it is with the Gaza Strip. We will not allow a drizzle and we will respond strongly, and if need be, will carry out preventive action. We hold the Lebanese government responsible for firing that is carried out from within its territory. What is happening in Lebanon is that Hezbollah is stationing thousands of missiles and rockets in apartments, in the heart of the civilian population, and is thus perpetrating two war crimes simultaneously. It is organizing the firing at civilians, just as it did today, and it is hiding behind civilians as human shields.

This is a double war crime that that is being perpetrated under the aegis of the Lebanese government and army, which are not lifting a finger to prevent this arming and these crimes. We hold the Lebanese government responsible for this development. We also know that Iran, of course, is behind this arming by Hezbollah. It is the same Iran which is continuing to assist the Syrian government in slaughtering civilians and which is continuing to arm terrorist organizations that are perpetrating acts of terrorism in many countries. It is also the same Iran that is currently developing centrifuges that are capable of enriching uranium six times faster than its regular centrifuges.

All of this is being done now, before the agreement with Iran is written. Even before the agreement is signed I see that the Iranian economy is recovering somewhat. We are monitoring these developments and are pointing them out to the world. We continue to see preventing the nuclearization of Iran as our main goal vis-à-vis the national security of the State of Israel, as well as the security of the region and the entire world.”

II Iran disavows the nuclear agreement made in the minds of John Kerry and the rest of the world’s useful idiots.

Iran nuclear facilities will keep running
Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:9PM GMT
http://presstv.com/detail/2013/12/19/340831/iran-nuclear-facilities-to-keep-running/

Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) says the country’s nuclear facilities, including Arak heavy water reactor, will continue running, dismissing Western governments’ call on Tehran to suspend activities of the facility.

“Iran’s nuclear facilities, including the Arak reactor, will continue running at full capacity,” Ali Akbar Salehi said on Thursday. He made the remarks in a meeting with Grand Ayatollah Hossein Nouri Hamedani in the holy city of Qom.

“We will never give up this important achievement and we have no intention of losing it,” Salehi said of the Arak reactor.

Earlier this month, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) visited the Arak heavy water facility as part of Tehran’s goodwill gestures to remove ambiguities about the peaceful nature of its nuclear energy program.

The United States, Israel, and some of their allies have repeatedly accused Iran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear energy program. Iran rejects the allegation, arguing that as a committed signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the IAEA, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Salehi also said Iran’s recent nuclear deal with the six world powers protects the Islamic Republic’s nuclear rights.

In November, Iran and six world powers ˆ the US, Britain, Russia, China, France and Germany ˆ signed a landmark nuclear deal in the Swiss city of Geneva to set the stage for the full resolution of the Western standoff over Iran’s nuclear energy program.

Obama’s 2013 Foreign Policy report card via Chas. Krauthammer, Stephen F. Hayes, Nina Easton and Shannon Breen with the Fox News Special Panel

A redaction of the transcript from the TV show, 6:45 PM, December. 26, 2013

By Jerome S. Kaufman

Host – Shannon Breen with her usual excellent job.

Charles Krauthammer – Internationally syndicated columnist

Stephen F. Hayes – Senior columnist, The Weekly Standard

Nina Easton – Senior editor and columnist for Fortune Magazine

The lead-in TV clip to the show was a statement by Obama’s chief designated prevaricator, Susan Rice, who, for her supreme loyalty to Obama and personal sacrifice giving patently false testimony concerning BenghaziGate, has been awarded the critical role of United States National Security Advisor.

Rice did exemplary work obscuring the role of Obama and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the awful fiasco where you may remember (Hopefully at the 2016 election) Clinton stated, “What different does it make” referring to the deaths of a US ambassador and 3 other staunch American patriots in the line of duty!

In the clip Susan Rice claimed that Obama’s foreign policies had not been a disaster at all and went on to have the temerity (read “chutzpa) to declare the Arab Palestinian/Israeli and Syrian efforts as high points of the Obama administration’s successes! The Panel had no difficulty using her statements as a launching pad for their own evaluation.

Steve Hayes: “Obama’s foreign policy is a disaster. The problem with President Obama’s foreign policy is that there is no foreign policy. It is an ad hoc policy with decisions made moment to moment. Our allies and our enemies have no idea what he is doing and have no faith in whatever it may be. Furthermore, there is no follow-up after the campaign speech, as usual. Consequently we are in real trouble for the next 3 years of his administration.

Shannon Breen: According to a new Pew poll, 53% of Americans see the United States as less powerful and with a less important role in the world than we had a decade ago. This is the worst evaluation since Pew began that question in 1974.

Nina Easton: This is especially true in the Middle East. The most under reported story affecting our own security is the explosion of the presence and influence of Al Qaeda and the implosion of Iraq – the country that cost us 4500 American lives! This administration thought they could deal with Al Qaeda simply by killing Bin Laden and then using drones and not getting involved beyond that. The fact is that Al Qaeda is on the rise throughout North Africa, flourishing in Syria as a result of our not helping the rebels against Assad while Iraq has become a client state of Iran.

Furthermore, Al Qaeda is now staging 30-40 suicide bombings per month in Iraq. We spent 10 years in Iraq trying to save the country and Obama left leaving no US troops in place to safe guard our interests. The result – Iraq is on the brink of disappearing as an independent nation.

Shannon Breen: Afghanistan is another hot spot in which Obama’s vacillating policies with President Karzai have weakened our power. What will happen in 2014 remains to be seen.

Charles Krauthammer:

Let’s start by answering some of the data points that Susan Rice presented in the video clip.

In Egypt Obama gave the heralded Cairo speech announcing his “leading from behind” policy. It was really a foretelling of the policy of retreat.

Now if we look at Egypt, we have managed to make everybody hate us! The Brotherhood, the Religious, the Secular arm and the Secular opposition. That is quite a feat for one brief administration.

In Libya where Obama again led from behind, he left a disaster which has become another staging center for Al Qaeda and where we saw the resultant shameful Benghazi massacre.

In West Africa, Al Qaeda would now be in control if it had not been for the French who interceded in their and our behalf despite the opposition and deliberate lack of participation by Obama.

As Nina (Easton) indicated, in the Middle East, we now have Iraq as a client state of Iran and Obama boasted in his year-end press conference about “our success in ending the war in Iraq.” In fact, Obama abandoned Iraq. It was a won war until his intervention. The level of violence was historically low. The civil war had ended. Al Qaeda was not only defeated but humiliated when the Sunni Muslims joined with Infidels (meaning us) in defeating Al Qaeda, a fellow Muslim entity. Now Al Qaeda is revived. It controls wide swaths of Iraq and Syria and forced its way into the Middle East beyond their wildest expectations.

One other of Susan Rice’s data points – Obama has somehow managed the miracle of uniting the Gulf State Arabs, Saudi Arabia and Israel in their mutual astonishment at Obama’s conceding the nuclear bomb to virtually unfettered Iranian development. This policy shift was sprung upon them by Obama leaving the Gulf States with no information and virtually defenseless. At least, the Israelis are still able to defend themselves. (Although, John Kerry with Obama’s encouragement, is working diligently to destroy that ability)

Because of all of the above everyone in the Middle East is wondering where the United States really is? Obama’s policy of retreat has allowed the bad guys to fill the vacuum. What catastrophic lead from behind is next?

(On a personal note: Again, all these illustrious speakers refer to Obama as if he were some kind of inept nincompoop. I wish they would spend some time with my hero, Dinesh D’Sousa, who pegged Obama, a long time ago, not as a nincompoop but a deliberate destroyer of the US both internationally and domestically — a genuine Manchurian Candidate who knows exactly what he is doing.)

Wake up America!

Jerome S. Kaufman, Producer/Editor
www.israel-commentary.org

Ignoring the Grace of G-d

Ignoring the Grace of G-d

Redacted from portions of To Pray as a Jew
By Rabbi Hayim Halevi Donin
Basic Books 1980

In the Jewish tradition prayers and blessings are not confined to the synagogue or limited to the formal religious service. Though sanctuaries are built and set aside as special places for prayer, we do not believe that the Shekhinah, the Divine Presence, is restricted only to such places. God’s abode is the entire universe.

“Thus said the Lord: The heaven is my throne and the earth is My footstool; is there a house that you can build for Me, is there a place that can be My abode?” (Is. 66:1). If God commanded the Israelites to “make for Me a sanctuary” (Exod. 25:8), it was not for Him to dwell in it, but so that he could dwell “in their midst.” The language of Torah is very precise and revealing. The purpose of the sanctuary was not to house the Divine Presence, but to create an environment that would allow His spirit to penetrate the community and be reflected in the life of the people.

The synagogue is indeed vested with greater holiness than are other places, and the sages made it abundantly clear that they regarded it as the preferred place for prayer. While not discounting the enthusiasm shown for praying in the synagogue, the Talmud is equally clear that a prayer service may be held anywhere.

The only places where prayer is forbidden are places identified with idolatry or sexual lewdness, or places that are foul smelling or in sight of excrement. A hazardous place is also unsuitable for prayer. No one who has ever prayed in the splendid isolation of nature, where hills and valleys, forests and fields, skies and oceans provide inspirational testimony to God’s handiwork, can ever again think of the synagogue as the only place suitable for prayer.

But of all places outside the synagogue where Jewish prayer may take place, the home is first in importance. Like the synagogue, the Jewish home has also been described as a “small sanctuary.” There too does the Divine Presence dwell. Aside from those times when one prays privately at home because one cannot be at the synagogue there are many prayers and blessings that were from their inception intended to be said at home.

… Jews are to take special pains to make sure and pray after their meals not just when they are hungry. It often happens that when people are comfortable and their basic needs are met they turn away from God. This is precisely what troubled Moses when he instructed the Israelites to follow the commandment to bless God after eating.

Moses expressed his concern: Take care lest you forget the Lord your God and fail to keep His commandments . . . lest when you will eat and be sated and will build fine houses to live in, and your herds and flocks will multiply and your silver and gold will increase, and everything you own will prosper. Beware, lest your heart grow haughty and you then forget the Lord your God … and you say to yourselves “My own power and the might of my own hand have won this wealth for me.” (WRONG)

(I just came upon these passages and was struck by their pertinence perhaps because I see so much of this arrogant secularism around me and sometimes in my own family and it annoys and frightens me.

I can only pray that it does not annoy my G-d who is able to take it all away with one incidental gesture and allow instead, the burning bush to be consumed) jsk

Senator Tom Coburn unveils his new book – “Federal Waste Book 2013”

Senator Tom Coburn unveils his new book – “Federal Waste Book 2013”

By Veronique de Rugy
December 17, 2013

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) will unveil Wastebook 2013, his annual report on egregious federal spending, at a press conference on Tuesday, December 17, at 10 a.m. EST in Room S-325 of the Capitol.

There are many problems with government intervention. It’s expensive, it introduces distortions into the market, and it’s often unfair. It can introduce major costs to people’s lives, as people have discovered when their insurance policies were canceled and they were forced to buy more expensive and sometimes less-comprehensive policies because of Obamacare.

But then there’s the fact that government spends a lot of money on ridiculous causes of which almost no one approves. Senator Coburn and his staff have produced their annual list of outrageous stuff that the government spends with your hard-earned money. This year, it adds up to $30 billion. Here are a few examples from last year:

Tax loopholes for the NFL, NHL, and PGA – professional sports leagues that generate billions of dollars annually in profits ($91 million in lost tax revenue)

Moroccan pottery classes (part of a $27 million grant from the U.S. Agency for International Development)

Efforts to promote caviar consumption and production ($300,000)

A robotic squirrel named RoboSquirrel (part of a $325,000 grant from the National Science Foundation)

Promotion of specialty shampoos and other beauty products for cats and dogs ($505,000)

Corporate welfare for the world’s largest snack food producer, PepsiCo ($1.3 million)

Government-funded study on how golfers might benefit from using their imagination to envision the hole is bigger than it actually is ($350,000)

“Prom Week,” a video game that allows taxpayers to relive prom night ($516,000)

A scarcely used airport in Oklahoma that only exists to transfers federal funds elsewhere in the state ($450,000)

The 2012 Alabama Watermelon Queen tour, paid for in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture “to promote the consumption of Alabama’s watermelon” ($25,000)

Sean Davis over at the Federalist has more from this year’s list:

Tax breaks for brothel-worker breast implants

A government study on why wives should calm down

Life-coaching for Senate staff

A million-dollar bus stop in Arlington, Va.

$3 million of NASA work looking for signs of intelligent life . . . in Congress (This has to be a spoof?)

Federally funded solar panels at a New Hampshire airport covered up because the glare blinds pilots

The Bridge to Nowhere, still getting taxpayer cash

(For more detailed information, I guess you have to buy the book, if your stomach can take it.

In the meantime, the Obama government is cutting benefits to American war veterans!)

Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

I Peres Meets With Gulf Arab Leaders II Mordechai Kedar: The West’s Great Betrayal of Israel and Itself

Peres Meets With Gulf Arab Leaders

I Peres Meets With Gulf Arab Leaders II Mordechai Kedar: The West’s Great Betrayal of Israel and Itself

By: Steve K. Walz
December 4th, 2013

II The West’s Great Betrayal
Western countries ignore the rights of Iranians to live in freedom like the citizens of the West.

By Dr. Mordechai Kedar
December 1st, 2013

I Steven K Walz:

As the Iranians move closer to acquiring a nuclear bomb, an unprecedented meeting and a startling admission have buttressed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertions that President Obama’s Iran policy is alienating America’s Mideast allies.

Earlier this week Israeli newspapers reported that President Shimon Peres had been invited to speak at the Gulf Arab Security Conference in Abu Dhabi attended by 29 high-ranking ministers from Arab and Muslim countries. Peres, who spoke to conference attendees from his office in Jerusalem, focused on combating Iran’s nuclear program and Islamic extremism, urging Arab leaders to turn their attention toward building a dialogue for peace between Israel and the Arab world.

“There was a lot of excitement from both sides about Peres’s address” an Arab official associated with the event told Yediot Aharonot. “Everybody understood that this was something historic: the president of the Jewish State sitting in his office in Jerusalem with an Israeli flag and the foreign ministers sitting in the Persian Gulf discussing security, the war on terror and peace.”

Peres’s address coincided with the statement on Fox News by Michael Hayden, former head of the National Security Agency and director of the CIA during the George W. Bush administration, that the Iranians are “far too close to a nuclear weapon” and that the interim agreement signed in Geneva by the P5+1 powers will eventually lead Iran to becoming a “nuclear threshold state.”

Netanyahu and Saudi leaders have reportedly lost confidence in Obama’s diplomatic gambit and believe the White House is on the verge of accepting the inevitability of a nuclear Iran.

In a last-ditch effort to prove to President Obama and the leaders of France, Germany and the UK that Iran is lying about the military aspects of its allegedly peaceful nuclear program, Netanyahu has reportedly ordered Israeli military intelligence and Mossad teams to find irrefutable evidence of Iranian subterfuge.

An Israeli intelligence operative told the Sunday Times of London, “Everyone has his own view regarding the Geneva agreement, but it is clear that if a smoking gun is produced, it will tumble like a house of cards.” Israeli agents are focusing on three aspects of Iran’s nuclear efforts including secret nuclear enrichment locations, bomb-building blueprints and the expansion of ballistic missile sites that could deliver a nuclear weapon. At the same time, there have also been reports in the Arab media that Saudi Arabia’s intelligence service may launch a cyber attack upon key Iranian installations associated with the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

II The West’s Great Betrayal Western countries ignore the rights of Iranians to live in freedom like the citizens of the West.
By Dr. Mordechai Kedar
December 1st, 2013

The masses were threatening to topple the regime in Tehran during the 2009–10 Iranian election protests. The new Geneva agreement tore the mask from the face of hypocrisy that characterizes the politicians in the West today, who don’t care at all about Iranians’ right to freedom.

Since the signing of the Geneva agreement between Iran and the group of six countries at the end of last week, media outlets the world over have been discussing the agreement and the easing of sanctions, what Iran will give in return and the ability — which exists or does not exist — to oversee whether the Iranians, who have lied and cheated the world for many years, will faithfully carry out what they agreed to and signed on.

There were those who wondered about the absence of the demand for Iran to dismantle the plutonium reactor in Arak, whose purpose is only military, and there were those who calculated the time that would be required for the Iranians to renew the activity toward producing a bomb.

The media outlets of the world dealt quite a bit with Israel’s concern, the rage of the Saudis’ and people in the Gulf Emirates, and everyone wonders what Israel will do, who is not part of the agreement. The common element among most of those who have been discussing the matter is that everyone sees only two sides, Iran and the West, and ponders which of these two sides has gained more from the agreement.

Most of the commentators ignore the third party, large but silent, in pain but obedient, who experienced a major defeat as a result of the agreement. This party is the majority of eighty-million Iranians. It is no secret that the great majority of Iranian citizens hate the regime of the Ayatollahs with all their hearts, and from time to time express this hatred with demonstrations and street disturbances, such as those that swept the streets of Iran after the “elections” for presidency in June of 2009 and which brought about the deaths of hundreds of demonstrators who were champions of liberty and hungry for freedom.

They, the restless young men and women, secular up to their ears, aspiring to freedom but living under oppression, educated but unemployed, suffering from the terrible corruption that the regime of the ayatollahs is immersed in, hoped that the economic sanctions on the dark regime would suffocate it and bring it to its end.

This was not a wild hope: in the past it was learned that at the height of the wave of protest demonstrations about the stealing of the elections in which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was “reelected” in 2009, the rulers of Iran had two jets prepared in order to leave the country and escape from the raging masses. Now, after the agreement that was signed in Geneva, the sanctions are eased and the regime is beginning to breathe more easily.

The Iranian Rial – which had lost about half of its value in recent years — rose last week by two percent. The economic optimism causes new blood to flow in the clogged veins of the regime, and all of the freedom seekers in Iran feel that the historic opportunity to rid themselves of the dark fanatics who rule their lives and deaths has been squandered.

The sanctions, which were a non-violent weapon, could have subdued one of the most violent regimes in the world, if the Western countries had only maintained them. But the West has again shown its ugly face and the fact that money is more important in their eyes than values: the deals with the regime of the ayatollahs have so blinded the leaders of the western countries that they don’t see the rights of the Iranians to live in freedom like the citizens of the West.

The Geneva agreement tore the mask from the face of hypocrisy that characterizes the political behavior of many politicians in the West today. From their point of view the eighty-million Iranians can continue to live lives of misery, oppression and degradation under an illegitimate, cruel and bloodthirsty regime that spreads terror and death all over the world and is directly or indirectly responsible for the murder of many thousands in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, in Israel and in many other countries.

But the Geneva agreement brings Western hypocrisy to a new extreme: despite the fact that the experience of the Second World War still lives in historical memory, despite the fact that the entire world knows that submission to a dictator causes him to raise his demands and will not satiate his lust for power, despite the fact that “peace in our time” when it is based on concessions to a bloodthirsty tyrant brings “war in our time”, despite the fact that the West says that it is guided by its values, the bitter truth must be said: the right of the Iranians to free themselves of the oppressive regime does not really matter to any of the politicians who are responsible for decision-making in the West today, and the Jews’ right to live in the land of their forefathers also does not interest them. Money is the answer to everything and to Hell with truth and values.

Americans urged to support Black Republicans and help cure their dilemma with Barack Obama

Americans urged to support Black Republicans and help cure their dilemma with Barack Obama

BLACK REPUBLICAN POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (PAC)
From: Edward Cousar, Executive Director

As you know the lone black Republican in Congress — U.S. Senator Tim Scott is up for election this year after being appointed to his seat. The Democrats absolutely do not want to see Tim Scott win this Senate seat. Because Tim Scott is a strong conservative who is getting noticed by black voters. He is making the case loud and clear that the Republican Party is the party of hope, growth, and opportunity for Blacks.

Democrats believe that black voters belong to their party and should never abandon them. But they couldn’t be more wrong. Day by day, black voters are seeing that Obama just isn’t working for them.

—THE ECONOMY ISN’T ADDING ENOUGH JOBS
—TAXES ARE TOO HIGH
—OBAMACARE IS FORCING PEOPLE TO LOSE THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE
—TOO MANY FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED ONTO FOOD STAMPS
—DEMOCRATS PUT TEACHERS UNIONS AHEAD OF STUDENTS

Obama’s ultraliberal policies are crashing and burning in the most obvious way possible. And black voters are beginning to turn their backs on Barack Obama and his flailing presidency. A WSJ/NBC poll found that black voters support for Obama has dropped a WHOPPING 15 points. Yes, you read that right. Black support for Obama has DROPPED 15 points.

This offers Republicans an unprecedented opportunity to reach out to black voters and bring them into our party. But, to fund our efforts to reach out to the black community and to help black Republican leaders like Tim Scott…I need your dedicated financial support today.

More and more black Republicans are running for office. A few days ago, Black Entertainment Television (BET) ran a story on the exploding numbers of black Republicans fighting to be elected.

Black Republicans running for Congress include:

MIA LOVE FOR UT-4
WILLIAM HURD FOR TX-23
GLOREATHA SCURRY-SMITH FOR FL-5
ERIKA HAROLD FOR IL-13
KATRINA PIERSON FOR TX-32
DAVID WILLIAMS FOR IL-9, TO NAME JUST A FEW.

That doesn’t even touch, the dozens that are running for governor, state representative, sheriff, commissioner, treasurer or other elective office.

In 2010 BLACK REPUBLICAN PAC helped Tim Scott and Allen West to the U.S. Congress — a historic first. While Tim Scott was elevated to the Senate, Allen West unfortunately, was defeated in 2012 in a close election and now there are no black Republicans in the House.

In 2014 we must help black Republicans win their races and send a larger contingent of black Republicans to the House than ever before. Victories for black Republicans, and among the black community, would be an enormous blow to Barack Obama and the worn-out corrupt black leadership. It will strike them where they’re most vulnerable — their Achilles’ heel.

Our work is key to expanding our party and dealing the Democrats a crippling blow! We must show the black community that Republicans are the true-big, tent party.

Can I count on you for a donation of $100, $150, or even $200? Send directly to:

Black Republican PAC
PO Box 17457
Washington, DC 20041-0457

If we’re going to carry out our ambitious agenda of electing black Republicans to high office, I need you.

Please find your checkbook right now and join us to make the Republican Party relevant to the Black community. The United States of American can only benefit from such a turn of the political wheel.

Sincerely,

Edward Cousar, Executive Director

One man’s Advice: To Bomb or not to Bomb?

One man’s Advice: To Bomb or not to Bomb?

Strike Iran Now to Avert Disaster Later
Redacted from an article By NORMAN PODHORETZ

Wall Street Journal
Dec. 11, 2013

Not too many years ago, hardly anyone disagreed with John McCain when he first said that “the only thing worse than bombing Iran is letting Iran get the bomb.” Today hardly anyone disagrees with those who say that the only thing worse than letting Iran get the bomb is bombing Iran. And in this reversal hangs a tale.

The old consensus was shaped by three considerations, all of which seemed indisputable at the time.

The first was that Iran was lying when it denied that its nuclear facilities were working to build a bomb. After all, with its vast reserves of oil and gas, the country had no need for nuclear energy. Even according to the liberal Federation of American Scientists a decade ago, the work being done at the Iranian nuclear facilities was easily “applicable to a nuclear weapons development program.” Surprisingly, a similar judgment was made by Mohamed ElBaradei, the very dovish director of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The second consideration was that the prospect of being annihilated in a retaliatory nuclear strike, which had successfully deterred the Soviets and the Chinese from unleashing their own nuclear weapons during the Cold War, would be ineffective against an Iran ruled by fanatical Shiite mullahs. As Bernard Lewis, the leading contemporary authority on Islam, put it in 2007, to these fanatics “mutual assured destruction is not a deterrent, it is an inducement. We know already [from the Iran-Iraq war] that they do not give a damn about killing their own people in great numbers. . . They are giving them a quick free pass to heaven and all its delights.”

Nor were the rulers of Iran deterred by the fear that their country would be destroyed in a nuclear war. In the words of the Ayatollah Khomeini, who brought the Islamist revolution to Iran in 1979: “We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. . . . I say let this land [Iran] go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.” (The quote appeared in a 1981 Iranian collection of the ayatollah’s speeches. In later editions, that line and others were deleted as Iran tried to stir up nationalistic fervor amid the war with Iraq.)

And here, speaking in particular of a nuclear exchange with Israel—that “cancer” which the mullahs were and are solemnly pledged to wipe off the map—is the famous “moderate” Hashemi Rafsanjani, in an Al-Quds Day sermon at Tehran University on Dec. 14, 2001: “Application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel, but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.” Mr. Rafsanjani, an earlier president of Iran, is the sponsor and mentor of its current president, that other celebrated “moderate,” Hasan Rouhani.

The third consideration behind the old consensus was the conviction that even if the mullahs could be deterred, their acquisition of a nuclear capability would inevitably trigger a nuclear-arms race in the Middle East. Because the Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and elsewhere throughout the region were all terrified at the prospect of being lorded over and held hostage by an Iran ruled by their ancestral enemies the Shiites, those regimes would rush to equip themselves with their own nuclear arsenals.

Yet as the years wore on, it became clear, even to the believers in this strategy, that the Iranians would not be stopped either by increasingly harsh sanctions—or by endless negotiations. One might have expected the strategy’s proponents to conclude, if with all due reluctance, that the only recourse left was to make good on the threat of military action. Yet while they continued to insist that “all options are on the table,” it also became increasingly clear that for Western political leaders as well as the mainstream think tanks and the punditocracy, the stomach for the military option was no longer there, if indeed it had ever been.

And so began the process of what Col. Allard calls “learning to love the Iranian bomb.” The first step was to raise serious doubts about the old consensus. Yes, the Iranians were determined to build a bomb, and, yes, the mullahs were Islamist fanatics, but on further reflection there was good reason to think that they were not really as suicidal as the likes of Bernard Lewis persuaded us. That being the case, there was also good reason to drop the idea that it would be impossible to deter and contain them, as we had done even with the far more powerful Soviets and Chinese.

It was the new consensus shaped by such thinking that prepared the way for the accord reached by six major powers with Iran in Geneva last month. The Obama administration tells us that the interim agreement puts Iran on a track that will lead to the abandonment of its quest for a nuclear arsenal. But the Iranians are jubilant because they know that the only abandonment going on is of our own effort to keep them from getting the bomb.

Given how very unlikely it is that President Obama, despite his all-options-on-the-table protestations to the contrary, would ever take military action, the only hope rests with Israel. If, then, Israel fails to strike now, Iran will get the bomb. And when it does, the Israelis will be forced to decide whether to wait for a nuclear attack and then to retaliate out of the rubble, or to pre-empt with a nuclear strike of their own. But the Iranians will be faced with the same dilemma. Under these unprecedentedly hair-trigger circumstances, it will take no time before one of them tries to beat the other to the punch.

And so my counsel to proponents of the new consensus is to consider the unspeakable horrors that would then be visited not just on Israel and Iran but on the entire region and beyond. The destruction would be far worse than any imaginable consequences of an Israeli conventional strike today when there is still a chance to put at least a temporary halt, and conceivably even a permanent one, to the relentless Iranian quest for the bomb.

Mr. Podhoretz was the editor of Commentary from 1960-95. His most recent book is “Why Are Jews Liberals?” (Doubleday, 2009). (I don’t know if reading the book or any thing else will answer that one)