Religious Conversion Islamic Style

Islam’s History of Forced Conversions

Religious Conversion Islamic Style

By Raymond Ibrahim

Middle East Forum: Pajamas Media

September 29, 2011

Finding and connecting similar patterns of behavior throughout Islamic history is one of the most objective ways of determining whether something is or is not part of Muslim civilization. Consider the issue of forced conversion in Islam, a phenomenon that has a long history with ample precedents.

Indeed, from its inception, most of those who embraced Islam did so under duress, beginning with the Ridda wars and during the age of conquests, and to escape dhimmi status. This is a simple fact. Yet, when one examines today’s cases of forced conversions with those from centuries past, identical patterns emerge, demonstrating great continuity.

Consider: Days ago in Pakistan, two Christian men were severely beaten with iron rods and left for dead by a group of Muslims, simply because they refused to convert to Islam. According to Compass Direct News, they were returning from a church service when they were accosted by six Muslims. After they discovered they were Christian, the Muslims then started questioning them about their faith and later tried to force them to recite the Kalma [Islamic conversion creed, “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger”] and become Muslims, telling them that this was the only way they could live peacefully in the city.

They also offered monetary incentives and “protection” to Ishfaq and Naeem [the Christians], but the two refused to renounce Christianity. “After cajoling the two Christians for some time,” the Muslims pretended to go away, only to ram their car into the Christians: “The Muslims [then] got out of the car armed with iron rods and attacked Ishfaq and Naeem, shouting that they should either recite the Kalma or be prepared to die…severely beating[ing] the two Christians, fracturing Ishfaq Munawar’s jaw and breaking five teeth, and seriously injuring Masih…. [T]he two Christians fell unconscious, and the young Muslim men left assuming they had killed them.”

Contrast this contemporary account with the following anecdote from some 500 years past (excerpted from Witnesses for Christ, pgs.62-64): In the year 1522, two Christian brothers in Ottoman Egypt were denounced by local Muslims “mostly out of jealousy and envy”; so the emir arrested them and “began flattering them and asking questions about their faith.” The brothers made it clear that they were firm adherents of Christianity. “The Muslims in the audience became enraged with the brothers when they heard their answers, and they began screaming and demanding they must become Muslims.”

The brothers responded by refusing to “deny the faith we received from our forefathers, but we will remain unshaken and very firm in it until the end.” The Muslim judge deciding their case told the Christian brothers that if they simply said the Kalma and embraced Islam, they “would be given many honors and much glory”; otherwise, they would die.

At that point, the brothers’ mother came to support them, but “when the Muslims in court noticed her, they fell upon her, tore her clothing, and gave her a thorough beating.” After rebuking them for their savagery, the brothers reaffirmed that they would never deny Christianity for Islam, adding “behold our necks, do what you wish, but do it quickly.”

Hearing this, one of the Muslims in the audience became so angry that he took out a knife and stabbed Kyrmidoles [one brother] in the chest, while someone else kicked him as hard as possible, and another dropped a large stone on his head. Finally, they plucked out his eyes. Thus Kyrmidoles died. As for Gabriel [his brother] they threw him to the ground and one of the soldiers severed his right shoulder and then proceeded and cut off his head.

Now, consider the near identical patterns in the two accounts, separated by half a millennium: The Muslims first begin by talking to the Christians about their religion, suggesting they convert to Islam. Failing to persuade the Christians, the Muslims proceed to “cajole” and offer “monetary incentives and protection” (in the modern case) and “flatter” and offer “many honors and much glory” (in the historic case). All that the Christians need do is speak some words, the Kalma, and become Muslim. When the Christians still refuse, the Muslims fly into a savage rage, beating and torturing their victims to death (in the modern case, the Muslims assumed they had killed their victims).

Considering the Ottoman Empire and contemporary Pakistan are separated by culture, language, and some 500 years, how does one explain these identical patterns? What binds them together? Only Islam—Islam empowered, Islam in charge; Muslim majorities governing, and thus abusing their non-Muslim minority. A fact of life, past and present.

Raymond Ibrahim, an Islam specialist and author of The Al Qaeda Reader, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Obama uses Biden to cover his tracks

Obama uses Biden to cover his tracks

Redacted from article by  JPost.com Staff

The Jerusalem Post –  October 2, 2011

‘NY Times’ reports US vice president told rabbis in Florida “over my dead body are we going to let him out before his time”; Obama is yet to decide. US Vice President Joe Biden opposed offering clemency to jailed Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard, the New York Times quoted Biden as saying in an article published on Saturday. US President Barack Obama has yet to respond to a request from President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to grant clemency to Pollard.

“President Obama was considering clemency, but I told him, ‘Over my dead body are we going to let him out before his time,’” Biden said. “If it were up to me, he would stay in jail for life.”

In a press release circulated by the Justice For Jonathan organization, it is stated that the vice president gave “absolutely no clue as to the reason for his flip-flop,” which contradicts a video interview he gave in 2007 in which he expressed support for Pollard’s release via commutation of his sentence to time served:

Biden also did not offer any explanation, the statement said, to contradict the professional opinions expressed by the former head of the CIA, the former- attorney- general, several former secretaries of state, the former head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the former White House legal counsel and “a host of others intimately familiar with the case, who all think freedom for Pollard is long overdue.”

The group stated that Biden’s change of heart on Pollard supported the New York Times contention that Biden’s recent declaration that Pollard should never be released was a “stunt to take the hit for his boss, Obama.” The president has been repeatedly criticized for his silence in response to requests by high ranking American official requests for Pollard’s release, according to the group.

The New York Times reported that Obama is relying on Biden to help him retain the Jewish vote, seen by many to be slipping to the Republicans. Next month Pollard will complete his 26th year of a life sentence. Despite some warning signs, Democratic officials maintain that they do not think that Mr. Obama is in danger of losing the Jewish vote — particularly given the president’s muscular defense of Israel at the United Nations General Assembly last week.

But a Republican victory in the race for a Congressional seat in a heavily Orthodox Jewish district in New York three weeks ago clearly has some Democratic officials unsettled. So the White House has unleashed a barrage of officials — including Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, the United States ambassador to the United Nations — to soothe relations with American Jewish leaders.

 

The Media and the Tea Party

By L Brent Bozell III

Media Watch Center – America’s Media Watchdog

The liberal media will stop at nothing to cripple the Tea Party. They are attacking this grassroots movement because it is:

1) An effective force for conservatism
2) They need a bogeyman to blame for the economic disaster caused by the socialist policies of President Obama and his allies in Congress

The Media is all geared to help  left-wingers in the 2012 elections. Here at the Media Research Center (MRC) we’ve documented and exposed the media attacks against the Tea Party since it was born during the Obamacare battle in early 2010. Since then, the vitriol hurled by left-wing journalists against conservatives has grown coarser, in contradiction to all their pleading about “civility.” This was abundantly obvious in the fight over raising the federal debt ceiling in July and August.

Let’s look at some examples from that battle  and remember this is the same media that somehow blamed the Jan. 8 Tucson shooting of Congresswoman Gabriella Gifford and the killing of five others,  on the rhetoric of conservative talk radio and the Tea Party.

Remember also that President Obama gave a nationally televised speech in Tucson after the shooting calling for “more civility in our public discourse.” He also said, “at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized … it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

Okay, now fast forward to the debt-ceiling debate. On July 27, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman  blared, “If sane Republicans do not stand up to this Hezbollah faction in their midst, the Tea Party will take the GOP on a suicide mission.”  (Huh? The usual non-sequitar idiotic Friedman conclusions).

Two days later, MSNBC’s Steven Rattner seriously argued  “the problem with this is it’s like a form of economic terrorism. I imagine these Tea Party guys are like strapped with dynamite, standing in the middle of Times Square at rush hour and saying, ‘Either you do it my way, or we’re going to blow you up, ourselves up, and the whole country up with us.”  In other words, Tea Party Americans are like radical Islamic suicide bombers! Is that civil discourse?

That same day, July 29, Bloomberg News’ Margaret Carlson described Tea Party lawmakers as the “nihilist caucus”, which is, ‘Listen, we want to burn the place down.’ … They’ve strapped explosives to the Capitol and they think they’re immune from it. The Tea Party caucus wants this crisis.”

(Note to Carlson: By the way, President Obama’s communist friends, Bill Ayres and Bernadine Dohrn did in fact, participate in actual bombings of the Capitol and the Pentagon in 1971-72 and somehow got away scott-free!)

Over at CBS, the marginally more rational Bob Schieffer exclaimed, “Some people say the Republican Party has been held hostage by the Tea Party.” At least at CBS Tea Partiers have been downgraded from terrorists to kidnappers. Howard Fineman of The Huffington Post threw another twisted analogy into the mix by telling viewers of MSNBC’s Hardbail, “What’s going on here, as I see it, is a kind of slow-motion secession…. The Tea Party people are saying, we want to secede from that society.”

Hardball  host Chris Matthews (of Obama speech making shivers run up his leg fame) smeared the Tea Party for backing real spending cuts and a balanced budget amendment as part of the debt-ceiling deal. After the vote on the deal, Matthews lamented, “What I saw at least was one guy with a knife and the other trying to avoid being cut. It was a thug attacking a victim. It was a mugging. The mugging continues, again and again and again. The people who perpetrated this assault on the president will come back to do it again.” Nice civility, don’t you think?

Putting the arsenic-icing on the rhetorical cake, totally predictably Far Left, New York Times columnist, Maureen Dowd snapped: “Tea Party budget-slashers were like cannibals, eating their own party and leaders alive. They were like vampires, draining the country’s reputation, credit rating and compassion. They were like zombies, relentlessly and mindlessly coming back again and again to assault their unnerved victims, Boehner and President Obama.”

Not surprisingly, the oh-so sensitive left-wing media said nothing about this vile rhetoric. While the debt deal was a loser for conservatives – no real spending cuts and no balanced budget – the hberal media also know the political fallout is bad for Obama especially the downgrading of America’s credit rating by Standard & Poor’s. So, they’re trying to shift the blame to the Tea Party.

In an MRC press release, yours truly (Brozell III) said, “To blame the Tea Party for the S&P downgrade is like blaming the Betty Ford Clinic for alcoholism. The entire existence of the Tea Party movement has been based on an attempt to stop the runaway spending of Washington – by the likes of John Kerry.

This is a well-coordinated effort by the left-wing to deflect bad news – very bad news away from their very left-wing President Obama.” The liberal media will do anything to cut the Tea Party off at the knees and cover for Obama and liberals in the 2012 election year. The discourse is only going to get worse.

Media Watch Center is tracking, exposing, and neutralizing that well orchestrated serial dishonesty every day, through our MRC divisions online, and in print, on talk radio, television, Facebook,Twitter, and through our MRC Action Team. The battle is intensifying and we are advancing, so stay tuned.

Sincerely,
L. Brent Bozell III
Founder and President, Media Research Center

Shocking Facts on US Poverty!

Obama Depression – Poverty Rate at Highest Since 1993

Shocking Facts on US Poverty!

CHTPPUNDITS.COM
September 13th, 2011

By Andrew Zarowny

More bad economic news for the Obama administration as the United States Census Bureau reports that the poverty rate is now at 15.1%, the highest since 1993. The actual number of American people in poverty is at a 52-year high.

On top of that, the median household income has dropped to the lowest level since 1996. The unemployment rate is chronically high with long term average now at 40 weeks, something not seen since the Great Depression. Meanwhile, all we get from Barack Obama is another watered down stimulus spending program disguised as a jobs bill. All of its provisions are short-termed, usually ending on January 1, 2013, when, conveniently, taxes are raised to pay for the darn thing.

More than 14 million Americans are without a job. Around 35 million either have no job or are working part-time jobs to make ends meet. The Census Bureau now reports that around 46 million live in poverty, about one in six. Despite the glories of ObamaCare, the number of uninsured Americans has increased to 49.9 million, up nearly a million just since 2009. That would make for 16.1% of Americans being without any health insurance.

To call the Obama administration a failure is too kind at this point. Now, it is a total disaster! A man-made disaster, caused by Barack Obama and his Democrat allies. We are now long past the textbook definitions of recession. The number of American people at or below the poverty rate is now at its highest since 1993. The median household income is at its lowest since 1996. If we were a parliamentary form of government, Obama would have already been sent packing from a vote of no confidence. The new report by the United States Census Bureau, coupled with the never-ending sags of chronically high unemployment rates, spells the word Depression. The Obama Depression lies on the shoulder of Barack Obama, as his policies have not only failed, but have made things far worse.

It’s Rosh Hashanah, Israeli Style – (great musical video) 

It’s Rosh Hashanah, Israeli Style – (great musical video) 

“If I forget thee, O’ Jerusalem,
Let my right hand forget it’s cunning.
  Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth,
if I remember thee not; if I set not Jerusalem
above my greatest joy.”
 
In these critical days
may we all renew our ancient promise.
 
And may our prayers be fulfilled
for health, happiness, and a sweet year
for you and your loved ones.
 
Shana Tova U’Metuka!
 
Jerry Kaufman
www.israel-commentary.org

Many thanks to Drs. Ruth and Richard Rolnick for this fun Rosh Hashanah card
 

 
 

I Obama coerces weak Netanyahu II Magnificent Netanyahu Response at UN on Video

I Fellow MK (Member of Knesset) blasts Obama and Netanyahu

II PM Netanyahu responds in his usual magnificent manner before UN General Assembly, Sept.23, 2011 – Video below

JewishJournal.com
September 20, 2011

A Knesset member visiting Los Angeles has accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of buckling under intense pressure from President Barack Obama, who wants to prevent any Israeli retaliation against the Palestinian Authority in its bid to win recognition as a state from the United Nations.

Dr. Aryeh Eldad, a member of the self-described “right-wing” Hatikvah faction of the National Union party, charged that Obama was holding Netanyahu “at gunpoint” – the gun being the U.S. threat to go back on its promise to veto the Palestinian statehood bid in the UN Security Council.

Specifically, Obama has demanded that Netanyahu and Israel’s supporters in the United States pressure Congress to abort two pending resolutions to penalize the Palestinian Authority (PA) if it pursues its bid, Eldad claimed.

One would shut off U.S. aid funds to the Palestinians and a second would support Israel’s right to annex the West Bank. The legal justification for such actions, cited by many Israeli officials, would be that the unilateral statehood request would be a direct violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords.

Eldad said he was certain of the accuracy of his information, but declined to name his sources.

“Netanyahu is the first Israeli prime minister who hasn’t threatened sanctions if the PA seeks unilateral statehood,” Eldad said during a phone interview.

Asked what he would do if he were prime minister, Eldad replied, “I would immediately annex Judea and Samaria (West Bank). There will be some riots, as in the two intifadas, but this will happen in any case, because the expectations of the Palestinians can never be met. They think the sun will rise in the west the day after independence.”

Eldad’s National Union has four Knesset seats and is in the opposition, but he asserts that a total of 42 members, many belonging to the government coalition, share his viewpoint.

As to his stand on an eventual negotiated two-state solution, Eldad, a prominent physician before he turned to politics, said he was enthusiastically in favor – as long as the Palestinian state was Jordan. He predicted that when the Arab Spring uprisings reached Jordan, Palestinians, who make up the majority of the population, would take over and turn the country into their own state. If this happens, Eldad said, he would oppose a forcible transfer of Palestinians from the West Bank to Jordan.

Eldad is nearing the end of his 15-day stay in the United States, during which he lobbied Congress members in Washington, D.C., met with Jewish organizations in New York, and on Sunday addressed some 2,000 evangelical Christians at the Calvary Chapel in Costa Mesa.

Based on his various meetings, he described the American Jewish community as largely confused, with even strong lobbies such as AIPAC sidelined “as long as Netanyahu is not strong enough to lead.”

Will there ever be peace? “Maybe in four generations,” Eldad responded, Israel and its neighbors will find equilibrium “like Europe after its religious wars.”

II PM Netanyahu’s magnificent response before UN General Assembly Sept. 23, 2011

What “peace” are Obama and Hillary demanding of Israel? With whom?

From: Morton A. Klein, President Zionist Org. of America

September 21, 2011

New Poll: Americans Believe 75% – 15% That Palestinians
Would Continue Campaign of Terror to Destroy Israel After Getting Statehood

A new poll has shown that Americans believe by an overwhelming 75% to 15% that if Palestinians obtain statehood in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, they will continue their campaign of terror to destroy the Jewish state. The poll, conducted jointly by Democrat Pat Caddell and Republican John McLaughlin, also found that:

· 71% of Americans believe that Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel, as opposed to a mere 9% who believe that the U.S. should force Israel to cede parts of Jerusalem, including Christian and Jewish holy sites, to the Palestinian Authority

· 82% of Americans believe that Palestinians must recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state before obtaining statehood, as opposed to a mere 7% who disagree

· 66% of Americans believe that Iran would attack Israel with nuclear weapons once it obtains them, as against 13% who believe otherwise

· 70% of Americans believe that Iran would attack U.S. military bases and ships in the Persian Gulf and Middle East once it obtains nuclear weapons, as opposed to 21% who believe otherwise

· 80% of Americans believe that, were Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, it would pass these onto terrorists with which to attack the U.S., as opposed to 12% who did not think so

· 64% of Americans would approve of a military strike upon Iranian nuclear facilities in the event that international sanctions fail to stop Iran from continuing its nuclear weapons program, as opposed to 23% who would not approve such action

(McLaughlin & Associates & Caddell Associates National Survey, August 10, 2011).

ZOA National Chairman of the Board Dr. Michael Goldblatt said, “This latest survey shows that Americans continue to display strong support for Israel as a U.S. ally and clarity of understanding as to the nature of the Arab/Iranian war on Israel.

“These findings are also consistent with numerous surveys taken by a range of pollsters indicating strong and clear American public support for Israel over the Palestinian”

(President Obama, Secretary Hillary Clinton and the US State Department please take note. The Congress has known and acted upon these facts for years, despite administrative interference) jsk

Conventional wisdom re: Israel/US relations vs. the facts

US-Israel Ties: Conventional Wisdom Challenged

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”
“Israel Hayom” Newsletter, September 22, 2011

The suggestion that US-Israel relations are trending downward is a derivative of baseless conventional wisdom, as reflected in a recent study by Haim Malka, the Deputy Director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

For example, conventional wisdom assumes that the recent turmoil, on the Arab Street, has deteriorated Israel’s geo-strategic standing. However, the New Middle East Disorder threatens the survival – and exposes the tenuous nature and reliability – of every Arab regime. It underscores Israel’s unique stability, credibility, capability and unconditional alliance with the US. Israel’s added-value to the US is further enhanced by the pending US evacuation of Iraq and Afghanistan, which will shorten Washington’s strategic arm, possibly triggering an eruption of additional regional volcanoes.

While vital American interests remain intact, they face intensified threats, deeper Middle East penetration by Russia and China and
the rapid disappearance of dependable Arab allies. Israel is the only Middle East ally which could effectively extend America’s strategic hand without requiring a single American serviceman. Therefore, the regional upheaval necessitates expansion of the mutually-beneficial US-Israel strategic cooperation, such as:

The upgrading of port facilities in Haifa and Ashdod for the Sixth Fleet.

The prepositioning in Israel, for American use, of US combat aircraft, missiles, missile defense and counter-terrorism systems; closer cooperation between the defense industries of both countries;

Equalizing Israel’s ally-status to that of Australia and Britain; etc.

Conventional wisdom contends that US public support for Israel is declining. Nevertheless, a September 15, 2011 public opinion poll, published by the Capitol Hill newspaper, The Hill, reaffirms that support for Israel is an important issue for Americans, transcending religious, partisan, gender, age and economic lines, also among Independents, who constitute the most critical American voting bloc.

For instance, 63% of independent voters consider (a positive) US policy on Israel to be very, and somewhat, important. 76% of independent voters assume that President Obama is either
supportive (26%), or not sufficiently supportive (50%), of Israel.

According to 2010-2011 Gallup polls, support for Israel is rising, placing Israel consistently among the 5-7 most favored nations, while the Palestinians are lumped with the least favored Iran and North Korea.

Conventional wisdom presumes that the Palestinian-oriented tension between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu reflects a downward turn of strategic cooperation. Still, US-Israel strategic and commercial cooperation catapulted dramatically between 1948 and 2011, while Israeli Prime Ministers were bullied by US Presidents.

For instance, Truman imposed a military embargo to foil Israel’s declaration of independence. LBJ threatened Israel against preemption – and against annexation of East Jerusalem – in 1967. Reagan leaned on Israel to prevent the bombing of Iraq’s nuclear reactor, imposed a military embargo, opposed Israel’s war against the PLO in Lebanon and formally recognized the PLO.

And, Bush 41st opposed any pro-Israeli legislation in Congress and tried to cut financial assistance to Israel. In retrospect, since 1948, the frequent episodes of Palestinian-oriented tension between US Presidents and Israeli Prime Ministers, have been nothing but bumps on the path of an unprecedented surge in strategic cooperation.

Conventional wisdom supposes that US-Israel relations evolve, largely, around the Palestinian issue. However, the unique US-Israel ties have been nurtured mostly by shared Judeo-Christian values, which transcend contemporary democracy and peace. These values were instilled by the 17th century pilgrims, inspired the rebellion against Britain, coalesced by the Founding Fathers and forged the current US systems of government, education, law and morality.

Shared values have facilitated fertile collaboration in the face of mutual regional and global threats, while disagreements persist on the Palestinian issue. In addition, the US has leveraged Israel’s innovative manpower. According to George Gilder, one of America’s high-tech Gurus: “The US defense and prosperity increasingly depend on the ever-growing economic and technological power of Israel…We need Israel as much as it needs us.”

Irrespective of conventional wisdom, the two-way-street, mutually-beneficial relationship, between the leader of the Free World and its sole soul-ally in the Middle East, trends towards a dramatic enhancement in the face of dramatic mutual threats and challenges.

Turkey’s dodge using Israel as fall-guy. So, what else is new?

Op-ed: Turkey no economic powerhouse, Erdogan’s credit bubble will soon explode.

Guy Bechor Published YNET
09.15.11, 23:49 / Israel Opinion

Some refer to him as “the Middle East’s new sultan in a neo-Ottoman empire”– yet the truth about Erdogan’s kingdom is utterly different. We are not facing an economic power, but rather, a state whose credit bubble will be exploding any moment now and bringing down its economy.

The budget deficit of the collapsing Greece compared to its GDP stands at some 10%, and the world is alarmed. At the same time, Turkey’s deficit is at 9.5%, yet some members of the financial media describe the Turkish economy as a success story (for comparison’s sake, Israel’s deficit stands at some 3% and is expected to decline to 2% this year.) While Turkey’s economy grew by some 10% this year, this was merely the result of financial manipulation.

So how does the system work? The banks in Erdogan’s Turkey handed out loans and mortgages to any seeker in recent years, offering very low interest rates; this was in fact a gift. As the interest rate was so low, Turkish citizens used more and more credit, mostly for consumption. (sound familiar?)

And how did Turkey’s Central Bank finance this credit party? Via loans: Erdogan’s bank borrowed money in the world and handed it out to its citizens. However, Turkey’s deficit kept growing because of it, until it reached a scary 8% of GDP; by the end of the year the figure is expected to reach 10%.

Turkey’s external debt doubled itself in the past 18 months, which were election campaign months. Only a small part of the deficit (15%) was financed by foreign investment. The rest constitutes immense external debts.

Now it’s clear that Erdogan’s regime bought the voters in the recent elections. Most of the Turkish public elected him not because of Islamic sentiments, but rather, because he handed out low-interest loans to everyone. I will provide you with cheap money so you can become addicted to shopping, and you shall elect me.

The Israel diversion

This created Turkey’s credit bubble, which may explode any day now, because the date for returning the loans approaches. Will the Saudis help Erdogan as he hopes? This is highly doubtful. Nobody is willing to pay for attacks on Israel, and the West is annoyed by Erdogan’s thuggery. Why should they help him?

Moreover, Turkey’s unemployment rate is 13% and the local currency continues to plummet vis-à-vis the dollar – it reached its lowest levels since the 2009 global crisis. With a weak currency and with a stock exchange that lost some 40% of its value in dollars in the last six months, Erdogan wants to be the Middle East’s ruler?

Once the bubble explodes, the score with Erdogan will be settled, by the journalists his government ordered to arrest, by army officers charged with imaginary accusations, by the restrained scientists, the politicians, and mostly the general public, which shall be facing an economic disaster.

And this is where Israel comes into the picture. Why talk about the approaching economic catastrophe? Why talk about this disgrace, when it’s better to create an artificial crisis vis-à-vis Israel, a spin that the whole world will be talking about instead of talking about the sinking Turkey? After all, the Marmara raid happened more than a year ago, why did it emerge again now? Is it only because of the Palmer Report?

We shall wait a few more months, and then we shall see what really happens in the new sultan’s kingdom.

——————————————–
IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

High Noon at the UN

By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”

“Israel Hayom” Newsletter, September 12, 2011

President Obama joins the campaign against the Palestinian UN initiative in spite of his belief that the UN is the quarterback of international relations, in defiance of his closest advisors – UN Ambassador Susan Rice, Director of Multilateral Affairs Samantha Power and Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett – and irrespective of his support of Palestinian claims and his assumption that the Palestinian issue is the root cause of Middle East turbulence and the crown jewel of Arab policy-making.

However, President Obama operates within the Federalist system which precludes an omnipotent president, and significantly constrains his maneuverability. It accords Congress – a bastion of support of the Jewish State – power equal to that of the President, domestically and internationally. The clout of Congress grows in direct correlation to the weakness of Obama, whose popularity plunged from 65% in January 2009 to 39% in August 2011.

Obama is aware that House and Senate Democratic leaders, such as House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, Ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Relations Committee Howard Berman, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and former Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Robert Menendez, would suspend foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority, should the Palestinians proceed with their UN initiative. The President is cognizant of the fact that their support is critical to his reelection aspirations in November 2012.

Moreover, the US Congress constitutes the most authentic representative of the American people, who – especially upon the tenth anniversary of 9/11 – consider Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims as part of the terrorist threat, view the UN as a role-model of ingratitude and treat Israel as a special, capable, democratic and unconditional ally.

The US campaign against the Palestinian initiative at the UN is driven by the American People’s and Congress’ identification with the Jewish State, and by their mistrust of the UN and the Palestinians. According to a May 26, 2011 CNN poll, 82% of Americans consider Israel an ally and a friend, compared with 72% in 2001. 67% support Israel, while only 16% support the Palestinians, who are as unpopular as Iran (15%) and North Korea (17%). According to a February, 2011 Gallup poll, 68% consider Israel an ally; the April 2011 Rasmussen Report shows that most Americans oppose foreign aid to Arab countries but support foreign aid to Israel; a September 2010 Rasmussen Report indicates that most Americans are willing to defend militarily only five other countries – Canada, Britain, Israel, Germany and Mexico; and the April 2010 Quinnipiac Polling Institute determines that 66% expect Obama to improve treatment of Israel.

According to a February, 2011 Gallup poll, 62% of Americans think that the UN is performing poorly, compared with 30% in 1953. A February, 2011 Rasmussen Report determined that only 27% of likely US voters regard the UN as an ally of the US, while 15% consider the UN an enemy and 54% are undecided.

Congressional attitudes toward the UN reflect public resentment of anti-American bias in the UN, a home court for anti-US countries in general and Islamic and rogue regimes in particular, even though the US funds 22% of the UN budget. Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, recently introduced the United Nations Transparency, Accountability and Reform Act, which would cut off US contributions to any UN entity that grants membership, or any other upgraded status, to the Palestinian Authority.

According to Ros-Lehtinen, “UN obsession with castigating Israel — from the Human Rights Council and the Goldstone Report and the Durban conferences to the multitude of UN bodies created for the sole purpose of condemning Israel — has eliminated UN credibility…. The UN’s most infamous anti-Israel act came in 1975, when the General Assembly voted to declare that ‘Zionism is racism.’”

Will Israel leverage the US attitude toward the UN and the Palestinian Authority, or will it persist in the policy of indecisiveness and retreat, which was initiated by the 1993 Oslo Accord?

You’re damn right it’s a Ponzi Scheme

Ponzi! Ponzi! Ponzi! – The Truth About Medicare and Social Security

Posted by Conservative Byte, September 14, 2011

Ponzi! Ponzi! Ponzi! There, I said it. To the extent people believe there are trust funds with their names on them, Social Security is absolutely a Ponzi scheme. So is Medicare. People need to hear it.

Many people think that when the government takes payroll tax from their paychecks, it goes to something like a savings account. Seniors who collect Social Security think they’re just getting back money that they put into their “account.” Or they think it’s like an insurance policy — you win if you live long enough to get more than you paid in. Neither is true. Nothing is invested. The money taken from you was spent by government that year. Right away. There’s no trust fund. The plan is unsustainable. Medicare is worse.

Mitt Romney and other Republicans who scoff at Rick Perry shamelessly pander to older voters. They should tell people the truth. Still, I’m not convinced Perry has more than a sound bite. In his USA Today op-ed this week, the most he says is, “We must consider reforms to make Social Security financially viable.”. He doesn’t say what kind of reforms.

Viewer Responses to Ponzi! Ponzi! Ponzi! – The Truth About Medicare and Social Security

Ronnie says: 


Social Security and Medicare was originally set up as a trust fund. The money kept on accumulating until there was billions of dollars in the fund. One day one of our Presidents (I won’t say which one} that since that money was just setting there accumulating, we should put it in the general fund. Social Security and Medicare have been on a downward spiral ever since. Don’t listen to their lies, that money was supposed to be USED ONLY for people on Social Security and Medicare and not for political needs and bonuses.



Paul McDonald says:


Perry is right, S/S and Medicare is a Ponzi scheme. In fact our whole federal government is a Ponzi scheme. Look at how it works . We give them tax money , they give us some money and benefits back. They give a lot of money to organization. Those organization give a lot back to there campaign coffers. The government gives a lot of our money to foreign countries we get nothing back.
 Now they are crying about going broke and need more money to give away , or they are going bankrupt ! They need more taxpayers to pay into the funds so they can give and receive.

Robert Thomson says:


I do not agree with the “Ponzi” call. 
The working people have paid 15 percent of everything they earned in their lifetime. The government told them (and if we go back a few decades, people believed what the government said) the money would go into a trust fund, where it would accumulate to pay for retirement when the worker got too old to work. 
Then the government STOLE the money. 
That isn’t a Ponzi scheme. It is a criminal act.


Red says:
Of course it is, but we are not supposed to say so. The SS system never had a prayer as time marched on. However, no one knew what to do about it and all those who have tried, like GW Bush, have been vilified by people who don’t have a clue about SS. It is an unworkable system dreamed up and put into action, in Germany, in the 19th century.



Ron Johnson says:


Both of these programs are worse than Ponzi schemes because it is mandatory that money is withdrawn from your paycheck. All those who die prior to their sixty-second birthday get a grand total death gratuity of $250.00 even if they paid in for more than forty years. Such a deal for the government! This might pay for some of the flowers. The same goes for Medicare. If one dies prior to their sixty-fifth birthday they get zero Medicare dollars. Just check the obituary pages and see just how many people die prior to getting their first dollar from a system 
that they paid into all of their working life.














I Obama deliberately beclouds Muslim Identity of 9/11 Terrorists. II PM Netanyahu Israeli Cabinet Communique

II PM Netanyahu Israeli Cabinet Communique September 11, 2011

I Helen Freedman, Executive Director
Americans For a Safe Israel
September 12, 2011

It was my privilege to participate in the outpouring of pain, memory, and truth at the profoundly moving Freedom Rally, organized by AFDI leader Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch. As we recalled the agony of that horrific day, Sept. 11, 2001, we stressed that it is important not to forgive or forget and to outspokenly name the enemy – radical Islam – which declared war on America and the world on that fateful day.

The following report is from Fern Sidman, NY correspondent for ARUTZ SHEVA.
12/09/11 12:05

Over 500 at Defiant Freedom Rally Near Ground Zero

On Sunday afternoon, September 11th, over 500 people gathered at Park Place and West Broadway in lower Manhattan to mark the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that left close to 3000 Americans dead.

Organized by the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), a human rights organization headed by author and activist Pamela Geller, (who achieved notoriety for spearheading the campaign against the construction of a mosque at Ground Zero), the 9/11 Freedom Rally featured members of the clergy, New York City fire fighters and police, 9/11 first responders, and 9/11 family members who were barred and/or not invited to the official ceremonies that took place earlier in the day.

The decision to exclude religious leaders, rescue workers, police officers and other key first responders as program participants was defended by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg who said,:”We just don’t have room for them”, claiming space and security are the issues.

In a tone of defiance AFDI Executive Director Pamela Geller declared, “While White House guidelines forbid official 9/11 ceremonies from mentioning who attacked the U.S. on that day or why, our 9/11 Freedom Rally features more honest speakers. We are here today to honor our war dead and stand for freedom and against the deception and lies being used to subdue us. We must show the jihadists we are unbowed in the defense of freedom.”

Joined by Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, Ms. Geller introduced such speakers as George Demos, New York Congressional candidate, Anders Gravers of Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE); Sudanese ex-slave and freedom fighter Simon Deng; war hero and North Carolina Congressional candidate Ilario Pantano; popular radio host Joyce Kaufman; and Helen Freedman, Executive Director of Americans For a Safe Israel (AFSI), among many others.

Speaking on behalf of the 9/11 family members were Rosaleen Tallon, sister of hero firefighter and reservist in the United States Marine Corps, Sean Tallon, who was killed in the 9/11 attacks; Nelly Braginskaya, who lost her son Alex; Sally Regenhard, mother of hero firefighter Christian Regenhard, killed in the 9/11 attacks (Regenhard is an American activist who has become one of the leading voices for the families of the victims of September 11); Maureen and Al Santora, who lost their hero fightfighter son 9/11 and Alan DeVona, 911 first responder.

Reflecting on political realities that have been engendered over the last 10 years and taking aim at the current administration in Washington for its directives to whitewash the true motives of the 9/11 attackers, Helen Freedman of Americans For a Safe Israel said, “The Obama leadership today would still like us to be asleep. We are lulled with the myths of mindless multi-culturalism. Interfaith dialogues are encouraged to promote inter-denominational understanding. In today’s modern world, there has been no lack of understanding amongst Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and so forth.

What the Obama world is promoting is engagement and understanding of Islam as a peaceful religion, deserving of having its mosques built throughout the United States; its chaplains preaching in our prisons, everyone respecting the sanctity of the Koran, while all along the war is being waged under our noses.

II PM Netanyahu – Redacted from Israeli Cabinet communique on September 11, 2011

“Today, we mark exactly one decade since that monumental terrorist attack in which almost 3,000 innocent civilians of various nationalities were murdered in New York and Washington. That Al-Qaeda attack on the US marked the peak of a wave of terrorist attacks, which nevertheless continued in Madrid, London, Bali and Mumbai.

We are in this struggle, the struggle against terrorism, and while there is no doubt that this is terrorism, it is a tool of war. This is not a conventional war. This is a war of terrorism – by the forces and regimes of radical Islam. Radical Islam threatens moderate Islamic and Arab regimes. It threatens the very existence of the State of Israel and in its linking up with radical regimes, it brings the tools of terrorism – rockets and missiles – to Israeli civilians.

This network, which has several heads composed of two basic movements, denies the principles of progress and peace, and the principles of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. They seek to make a historic change, a historic regression, through the use of violence that knows no borders. Terrorism is their tool and therefore, we must know that we are in a decade of terrorism, of that same radical Islam that is implanted deep in the expanse between east and west, and – most of all – runs amok in the heart of our region. But, today it hangs over all of us, over the regimes and the stability of the
Middle East, over the security of Israel, over the security of Europe and the US and, in my opinion, over the security and stability of Russia and many other countries.

I would also like to say several words about Egypt. We had a difficult, very challenging weekend. I would like to thank my colleagues, Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, as well as the heads of the ISA and the Mossad, the IDF Chief-of-Staff and their people. I think that with very accelerated work we succeeded in preventing a very near disaster. The rioters broke into the embassy building, entered the embassy area itself, and were only one door away from our people, who were besieged in there.

Our people acted exceptionally. I commend Yonatan and his friends. They acted with equanimity and, at a certain stage, in very close coordination with the command center, the Foreign Ministry security personnel and with the commander on the ground in Egypt, after we established this connection. I must also note the actions of US President Barack Obama, who became involved at a critical time in order to use America’s influence on the issue.

… I am pleased that there are other forces in Egypt, beginning with the Egyptian government. There are also other voices that want to continue advancing the peace. We are in contact with the Egyptian government regarding the necessary procedures for returning our ambassador so that he and his staff will be properly secured, so that they might continue to maintain Israel’s representation in Cairo.

——————————————–
IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

Is President Obama a friend of the Jews and Israel?

By: Morton Klein, Nat’l President Zionist Org. of America
Dr. Daniel Mandel, Director, Center for Middle East Policy

Let’s look at the evidence:

Last week, the Obama Administration issued talking points for the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, where it referred to those struck by terrorism whether in New York or Nairobi, Bali or Belfast, Mumbai or Manila, or Lahore or London. Conspicuously absent was the name of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem or Sderot, which have been hit by terrorists, not once, but hundreds of times!

As a single instance, this omission might be unremarkable. In fact, however, omitting mention of Israel fits a pattern.

When running for President, then-Senator Obama referred in his July 2008 Berlin speech to the need to dismantle the [terrorist] networks that have struck in Madrid and Amman; in London and Bali; in Washington and New York. Again, no Israel.

It seems hard to believe that these omissions could be anything other than intentional. After all, Israel has been a primary target of terrorists throughout the past decade. Almost 2,000 Israelis have been murdered by terrorists in this period and over 10,000 maimed or disfigured. In per capita terms, far more Israelis have been murdered by terrorists than Americans were murdered in 9/11.

Obama also omits Israel in other contexts. Thus, when Haiti was struck by a calamitous earthquake in January 2010, Israel’s relief efforts were exceptional, only matched by those of the United States, and were singled out for praise by former President Clinton. However, in praising these relief efforts, Obama omitted any mention of Israel, saying only that help continues to flow in, not just from the United States but from Brazil, Mexico, Canada, France, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic, among others.

While Obama has more or less consistently failed to hold accountable or penalize the PA for incitement to violence against Israel, he has been emphatic and repetitive attacking Jewish housing projects in eastern Jerusalem as an obstacle to peace. His Administration has used the terms condemn, an insult and an affront when expressing disagreement with Israel on this issue, terms never used about other allies.

That Obama blames Israel, not the Palestinians, for the absence of peace is obvious. In a January 2010 interview, despite Israel’s acceptance in-principle of a Palestinian state, readiness to negotiate and instituting an unprecedented 10-month Jewish construction freeze in Judea and Samaria, Obama said Israel had made no bold gestures.

In a March 2011 meeting with Jewish leaders (attended by Mort Klein), Obama contended that Israel’s [Palestinian] partner is sincere in wanting a peaceful settlement, while asking his Jewish interlocutors to speak to your Israeli friends and relatives and search your souls to determine how badly do you really want peace. Israelis think this peace process is overrated.

Note also the contrast between his holiday messages to Jews and to Muslims. In his Rosh Hashanah message last year, Obama only once referred to Jews, not once to Judaism,‚ promoted a Palestinian state, and never mentioned the extraordinary contributions of Jews to the U.S.

In contrast, in his August 2010 Ramadan Message, Obama referred to Muslims‚ six times and to Islam‚ twice, stated that American Muslims have made extraordinary contributions to our country and praised Islam‚s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings and a faith known for great diversity and racial equality. (Huh?) Here, Obama, made no reference to what Muslims must do to achieve peace with Israel.

There are many other indicators of Obama evincing discomfort around Jewish matters. When, in May 2010, Obama signed the Daniel Pearl Press Freedom Act, he did not mention that Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter, was beheaded by Islamist terrorists because he was a Jew and that he was forced to state in the video recorded of his gruesome murder that he was an American Jew. Instead, Obama merely referred to Pearl’s loss.

And let’s not forget Obama’s June 2009 Cairo speech, in which he compared the circumstances of Palestinians under Israeli rule to Jews under the Nazis and blacks under Apartheid. Nor his September 2009 UN speech, in which Obama coupled unwavering commitment to Israel with Israel respecting the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestinians.

These incidents, some important, some less so, have assumed a troubling pattern. They suggest that President Obama has a distaste or even hostility towards Jews and Israel. But should we be surprised? He spent twenty years absorbing the anti-Israel sermons of Pastor Jeremiah Wright, whom Obama has called a great man, his friend and mentor.

Morton A. Klein is National President of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). Dr. Daniel Mandel is Director of the ZOA’s Center for Middle East Policy.

How to spoil a perfectly good lunch – Invite an Israeli diplomat to speak

By Jerome S. Kaufman

The Jewish Community Relations Council of Metropolitan Detroit, that purports to be the public affairs voice of the Jewish community here, which, of course it is not, asked the Zionist Organization of America, Michigan Region to help with an event. The ZOA was to obtain an audience and sponsor a luncheon for an Israeli diplomat the Council had brought in for a tour of the local Jewish community. The ZOA-MI did so and had a nice turnout.

Generally it has been our experience that Jewish Community Councils, Federations, the American Jewish Committee, Hillels and many other establishment Jewish organizations nationwide, have a propensity for a particular political point of view and almost invariably, a speaker is hired that not so subtly proclaims it.

We were therefore not surprised with the delivery of the diplomat who addressed us. She was Orli Gil, Israel Consul General for the Midwest based in Chicago. Ms. Gil was well spoken and had a list of diplomatic credentials attained over the years. She also had a history of appearing at gatherings sponsored by such organizations as listed above.

She assumed her post as Israeli Consul General to the Midwest region in July 2008 and is a career diplomat who has served in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for 22 years. Ms. Gil holds a BA in English and Hebrew Literature from The Hebrew University of Jerusalem – hardly an education, by the way, directed toward political expertise.

Ms. Gil spoke well enough. Unfortunately, the Israeli Government message that she presented was disappointing, to say the least. It was sometimes difficult to determine whose view was being presented – the Israeli or the Arab.

The terminology used by Ms. Gil was shocking. She had somehow learned to use the pro-Arab version. She spoke of Israel having “conquered” much Arab territory in 1967 and was “occupying” it to this day. She spoke of Israel “giving back” land that Israel had “conquered” and was fully prepared to “give back” more for peace.

Never did she seem to understand and certainly did not verbalize the fact that Israel had simply regained territory that should have been the Jewish Homeland in the first place. Never did she remind the audience that the Jewish claim to the land goes back over 3000 years. Never did she state that there is no genuine legitimate Arab claim to the land and that at no time was there an Arab nation on that land. In fact, the term “Palestinian” always referred to the Jews living there.

Arabs were simply designated as Arabs who had migrated into the area when the Jews began to drain the swamps, make the land habitable, utilized Jewish genius to bolster the entire economy and thus create jobs for these Arab immigrants. They streamed in from Iraq, Egypt, Syria and surrounding areas only because in Palestine and then Israel, they finally had a chance to make a decent living and to obtain the huge benefits of a democratic nation that they do not have in their own Arab countries to this very day.

If Consul General Gil and the entire Israeli diplomatic corps had read, From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine published in 1984 book by Joan Peters and describing, in great detail, the origins of the Arab population of Palestine, they would learn these basic facts. These facts have been studiously ignored by an Israel government too obtuse to understand their public relations significance.

Furthermore, Judea and Samaria (not “West Bank”), Gaza and the Golan Heights never “belonged” to Arabs and certainly not Jordan, Syria and Egypt, who themselves conquered them in 1948. At that time, these bordering nations invaded the newly “reborn” Jewish nation in an attempt to immediately abort its rebirth. To be perfectly accurate, these Arab nations were the “occupiers” from 1948 until they were finally expelled in 1967 by the Israelis in the Six Day war of self-defense.

But, this is all old hat and virtually beyond repair. What was even more depressing was Orli Gil’s discourse on the so-called “peace process” It appears that the Israeli Government under PM Netanyahu and his stalwarts Ehud Barak, Shimon Peres et al, who somehow, under the pathetic Israeli political system that keeps dinosaurs in power forever, are still pursuing a “peace process” which has been an unmitigated disaster.

Not one gesture of peace or huge swath of territory given to the Arabs has been reciprocated other than as a sign of weakness and a greater opportunity to enlarge their Arab terror bases against the Israelis.

Gil had the inane idea, as does her titular boss, Bibi Netanyahu, that the Arabs will eventually come to the table and give up their self determined right of return of millions of third generation “refugees”, they will agree to a demilitarized state, they will allow Israel to control the Jordan Valley, the Egyptian border, the Lebanese border, allow the IDF to police Judea and Samaria as needed to protect Israeli citizens, allow Jerusalem to remain undivided and remain only the capitol of the Jewish state and not make it the capitol of a “Palestinian” state, etc. and to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish State.

To me, this last requirement is the greatest of the abominations. How I as a Jew or Israel as a Jewish nation has to ask anyone to grant them the “right to exist” when we have over 3000 years of such an obvious existence and G-d given at that, is beyond abomination.

It is abomination enough to make me ill and to yearn desperately for the day when, G-d willing, Israel finally has political leaders with genuine self respect, genuine pride in their people and their nation and are finally able to shed off their sick dependency upon others and feel the need to plead with them to recognize Israel’s very “right to exist.” Instead, hopefully one day, we will have leaders with the confidence and strength to tell the immediate world exactly where to get off.

Jerome S. Kaufman

May G-d Bless US Representative Ileana Ros Lehtinen

To protect Israel at the U.N., money talks.

BY ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN
The Miami Herald, August 27, 2011

The recent onslaught of violent attacks against Israel reminds us of the growing threats facing the Jewish state. But even as extremists from Gaza fire rockets and mortars at civilians in southern Israel and cause death and destruction, we must not forget about another danger facing Israel: a unilateral campaign by Palestinian leaders to secure recognition from individual foreign governments and from the United Nations for a self-declared Palestinian “State.” This anti-Israel, anti-peace scheme must be stopped.

Abu Mazen’s Palestinian leadership has announced that they will seek recognition from the United Nations in September. They will likely turn first to the U.N. Security Council, where the United States holds a veto and should use it, although the Obama administration has yet to pledge that it will.

The next step would be the General Assembly, which has an automatic anti-Israel, anti-American majority made up largely of member states that are not democratic and other governments that repeatedly vote with rogue regimes and against Israel and the United States.

The General Assembly cannot grant membership to a “Palestinian state” without the approval of the Security Council, but the General Assembly can grant the present Palestinian observer the upgraded U.N. status of “non-member state observer,” which is the same status granted to Vatican City. Other U.N. agencies and programs could also grant membership or other upgraded status to Ramallah.

Such U.N. actions would severely undermine opportunities for a negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians. They would provide implicit recognition and legitimacy to a self-declared “state” and reward and reinforce the unilateral, rejectionist policies of the Palestinian leadership.

Restarting bilateral negotiations would become even more difficult. Ramallah could seize on the U.N.’s actions to escalate its efforts to demonize and isolate Israel internationally, including through seeking an International Criminal Court investigation in order to undermine Israel’s right to defend itself from attacks by violent extremist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah — including the very attacks that have killed several Israelis and wounded many others in recent days.

If the U.N. were to act in support of this unilateral Palestinian scheme, it would deal a blow not only to Israel and to the cause of peace, but to the U.N. itself. The U.N.’s obsession with castigating Israel — from the Human Rights Council and the Goldstone Report and the Durban conferences to the multitude of U.N. bodies created for the sole purpose of condemning Israel — has eliminated the U.N.’s credibility to aid in achieving peace and security in the Middle East.

The U.N.’s most infamous anti-Israel act came in 1975, when the General Assembly voted to declare that “Zionism is racism.” Over 35 years later and 20 years after the General Assembly repealed that resolution, the U.N. is still rightly discredited by that hateful act. Next month, if the U.N. again sides with Palestinian rejectionism and against Israel and peace, it will be “Zionism is racism” all over again. The U.N., not Israel, will lose whatever remaining legitimacy it holds, and it may never be able to recover.

Fortunately, we are not helpless in the face of this dangerous challenge. There is a historical precedent for how to stop it. In 1989, Yasser Arafat’s PLO also pushed for membership for a “Palestinian state” in UN entities. The PLO’s strategy looked unstoppable until the George H.W. Bush administration made clear that the U.S. would cut off funding to any UN entity that upgraded the status of the Palestinian observer mission in any way. The UN was forced to choose between isolating Israel and receiving U.S. contributions, and they chose the latter. The PLO’s unilateral campaign was stopped in its tracks.

This example demonstrates a simple but needed lesson: At the UN, money talks, and smart withholding of money works.

With Arafat’s successors up to the same tricks today, the U.S. response must be as strong. Unfortunately, the Obama administration has consistently refused to use our strongest leverage — our financial contributions — to advance U.S. interests at the UN. If the executive branch will not demonstrate leadership on this issue, Congress must fill the void.

I will soon introduce the United Nations Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act,which will reflect the executive branch’s previous successful policies by cutting off U.S. contributions to any UN entity that grants membership or any other upgraded status to the Palestinian observer mission. This legislation will also leverage U.S. taxpayer dollars to make sure they do not fund biased or wasteful UN activities, and to achieve other much-needed reforms that will make the UN more transparent, accountable, objective, and effective.

It is time to use all our leverage to stop this unilateral Palestinian scheme — for the sake of our ally Israel and all free democracies, for the sake of peace and security, and for the sake of achieving a UN that upholds its founding principles.

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), is Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.