John McCain Useful Idiot

I suppose it never dawned on Senator Maverick that the Jihadists might lie to him.

Via Daily Caller:

Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain hotly disputed a study claiming that at least half of Syria’s rebels are radical jihadis, repeatedly exclaiming “Not true, not true!”

“Frankly, I just disagree,”McCain told the Council on Foreign Relations audience, challenging the contention by defense consultancy IHS Jane’s that “the insurgency is now dominated by groups with at least an Islamist viewpoint of the conflict.”

“There’s about 70 percent still who are Free Syrian Army,” McCain said, flipping on its head the consulting firm’s research showing that just 30 percent are fighting for secular values.

McCain has frequently called for an increase in arms shipments to rebels groups fighting the Assad regime, and on Tuesday evening he sought to diminish concerns that these arms may one day be turned against the United States or its allies.

“The point, I think, that you and others are missing,” he told the questioner, “[is that] Syria is a moderate nation. Syria has the highest literacy rate of any nation in the Middle East. They are not going to submit to a jihadis or al-Qaida group governing them. They will not.”

“That’s a really a convenient cop-out to say, ‘Oh, we don’t know who they are,’” he continued angrily. “I know who they are. I was in Syria and I met them.”

Yep, you met them, and I am sure they were completely open and honest right Senator? I mean they would most assuredly never just tell you what you wanted to hear.

 

Some things to think about Did the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack?

1389 has a stunning post up you have to read.

What if Bashar didn’t do it?

Sit tight, ’cause I’ve got a story by a man whose credibility is intact and beyond repute. His name is Yossef Bodansky. He “is an Israeli-American political scientist who served as Director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare of the US House of Representatives from 1988 to 2004. He is also Director of Research of the International Strategic Studies Association and has been a visiting scholar at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

“In the 1980s, he served as a senior consultant for the Department of Defense and the Department of State. He is also a senior editor for the Defense and Foreign Affairs group of publications and a contributor to the International Military and Defense Encyclopedia and is on the Advisory Council of The Intelligence Summit,” and he has a piece today in Defense and Foreign Affairs. “There is a growing volume of new evidence” that the White House knew and possibly helped plan a Syrian chemical weapon attack by the opposition.

This is the first scholarly piece on it that I’ve seen.

So I want to throw this out to you, after the break here, as just a possibility, ’cause I’ve heard from a couple people who have lived in the Middle East (some of them claim to know Bashar) who say, “Basher just wouldn’t do it. He just wouldn’t gas his own people. There’s nothing in it for him. What’s in it for him to do this, other than get what’s happening now? What’s in it for him? Who benefits here by nerve gas being used, and how do you make the case that Bashar benefits?”

Anyway, that’s just speculation.

That’s not part of the scholarship in the piece.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: My friends, do you remember when the Syrian rebels overran and controlled a government base that had chemical weapons last summer? Even Leon Panetta admitted that chemical weapons may have fallen into their hands. This was last summer. I doubt that you remembered this. I doubt that anybody remembers it. Even people who keep up with the news every day, I doubt that anybody remembers that, so I want to remind you.

Syrian rebels — the same rebels that we’re talking about today — overran and controlled a government base, a Bashar Assad base, admittedly, that had chemical weapons last summer. And even Leon Panetta admitted that chemical weapons may have fallen into the hands of the opposition last summer. Now meanwhile, John Kerry and the regime and the media have used as their main argument the rebels have never had access to these chemical weapons.

I heard Rush talking about this today

There is a growing volume of new evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case, based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian opposition. 

The extent of US foreknowledge of this provocation needs further investigation because available data puts the “horror” of the Barack Obama White House in a different and disturbing light.

On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat Amriki”] took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.

Go read the rest. It is very compelling and thought provoking. Is it accurate? I have no idea, but I will say that from the beginning I have thought that the chemical attack benefited the “rebels”. I know John McCain swears by his “friends” but, frankly, that does not comfort me to any degree. 

The larger point is this. We do NOT know which side used these weapons, so getting involved would be the height of foolishness. And yes that does mean I do not trust John Kerry, or the president.

 

Wow, Obama keeps finding presidential powers he said presidents did not have

Another Liberal malady on display. Consistent Inconsistentitis

No consistency at all, NONE!

The trouble with striking Syria is this. If we strike Assad, and make no mistake, he is an evil bastard, then we help those seeking his overthrow. Do we really want to help those people, namely Al Qaeda? Do we really want to open the can of worms that this will open up? 

Further evidence that Walter Williams is a national treasure

walter-williams

It seems Walter Williams is boycotting George Mason’s “sensitivity training”

This week begins my 34th year serving on George Mason University’s distinguished economics faculty. You might imagine my surprise when I received a letter from its Office of Equity and Diversity Services notifying me that I was required to “complete the in-person Equal Opportunity and Prevention of Sexual Harassment Policies and Procedures training.” This is a leftist agenda for indoctrination, thought control and free speech suppression to which I shall refuse to submit. Let’s look at it.

Ideas such as equity and equal opportunity, while having high emotional value, are vacuous analytical concepts. For example, I’ve asked students whether they plan to give every employer an equal opportunity to hire them when they graduate. To a person, they always answer no. If they aren’t going to give every employer an equal opportunity to hire them, what’s fair about forcing employers to give them an equal opportunity to be hired?

Williams is a wise man, if only our president had a tenth of William’s wisdom just tink how much better of we would be? Here is more

Allied with the purveyors of equity, diversity and inclusion are the multiculturalists, who call for the celebration of cultures. For them, all cultures are morally equivalent and to deem otherwise is Eurocentrism. That’s unbridled nonsense. Ask your multiculturalist: Is forcible female genital mutilation, as practiced in nearly 30 sub-Saharan Africa and Middle Eastern countries, a morally equivalent cultural value? Slavery is practiced in Sudan and Niger; is that a cultural equivalent? In most of the Middle East, there are numerous limits on women — such as prohibitions on driving, employment, voting and education. Under Islamic law, in some countries, female adulterers face death by stoning, and thieves face the punishment of having their hand severed. Are these cultural values morally equivalent, superior or inferior to those of the West?

Western values are superior to all others. Why? The greatest achievement of the West was the concept of individual rights. The Western transition from barbarism to civility didn’t happen overnight. It emerged feebly — mainly in England, starting with the Magna Carta of 1215 — and took centuries to get where it is today.

One need not be a Westerner to hold Western values. A person can be Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, African or Arab and hold Western values. It’s no accident that Western values of reason and individual rights have produced unprecedented health, life expectancy, wealth and comfort for the ordinary person.

Western values are under ruthless attack by the academic elite on college campuses across America. They want to replace personal liberty with government control and replace equality before the law with entitlement. The multiculturalism and diversity agenda is a cancer on our society, and our tax dollars and charitable donations are supporting it.

A thought about this happening at George Mason University. 

English: Print of George Mason of Virginia bas...

English: Print of George Mason 

Mr. Mason, one of most wise Founders, must be spinning in his grave. But, I imagine he likely smiles from Heaven at Walter Williams.

Your Islamist Swine of the Day

Via Weasel Zippers

Via Independent:

One of the suspected killers who attempted to behead and disembowel a young soldier in the horrific Woolwich attack had listened to the preachings of a radical Muslim cleric banned from Britain over extremist activities, including alleged links to al-Qa’ida, The Independent has learnt.

The cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed has been secretly filmed stating that decapitation of the enemies of Islam was permitted. Today, in comments met with outrage, he told The Independent that he could understand the feeling of rage that had motivated the attackers and that what they had done could be justified under certain interpretations of Islam.

Michael Adebolajo, a British-Muslim convert of Nigerian origin who gave a video interview with a meat cleaver in his bloodied hands while the body of 25-year-old Drummer Lee Rigby lay on the street behind him, declared that he was fighting for “Almighty Allah”.

Last night the second suspect was understood to be Michael Adebowale, 22, of Greenwich.

Mr Bakri Muhammed, who now lives in Lebanon, told The Independent: “I saw the film and we could see that he [the suspect] was being very courageous.

“Under Islam this can be justified, he was not targeting civilians, he was taking on a military man in an operation. To people around here [in the Middle East] he is a hero for what he has done.”

Mr Bakri Muhammed said of the suspect: “I knew him as Michael when he came to the meetings and then he converted and he became known as Abdullah; I hear he then started calling himself Mujahid. He asked questions about religion, he was curious. He had first started coming when there was a lot of anger about the Iraq war and the war on terror. Whether I influenced him or not, I do not know. But he was a quiet boy, so something must have happened.”

This is the only photo of Bakri Muhammed I could find

pignose_xlarge

 

More backasswardsness from the Shariah Corner

How deep in the Pit of Moral Retardation can these monsters get?

Saudi cleric Sheikh Abdullah Daoud is calling for burkas for baby girls so that they won’t be so tempting to sexual deviants.

Al Arabiya reported:

A Saudi cleric has called for all female babies to be fully covered by wearing the face veil, commonly known as the burka, citing reports of little girls being sexually molested.

In a TV interview on the Islamic Al-Majd TV, which seems to date back to mid-last year, Sheikh Abdullah Daoud, stressed that wearing the veil will protect baby girls. The Sheikh tried to back his assertion with claims of sexual molestation against babies in the kingdom, quoting unnamed medical and security sources.

Recently picked up on social media, sheikh Dauod’s statement prompted wide condemnation from his fellow Saudis on Twitter. Some tweeps called for the Sheikh to be held accountable because his ruling denigrates Islam and breaches individual privacy.

Sheikh Mohammad Al-Jzlana, former judge at the Saudi Board of Grievances, told Al Arabiya that Dauod’s ruling was denigrating to Islam and Shariah and made Islam look bad.

Good Freaking Grief!

BREAKING! Iran nuclear facility hit? Updated Why the MSM is not covering this story

 The Brenner Brief has the story

Unconfirmed reports are trickling out of the Middle East stating last Monday an explosion rocked theFordo nuclear enrichment facility in Iran. Western news agencies haven’t corroborated the story; however, World News Daily is reporting that Hamidreza Zakeri, formerly a member of Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and National Security, has confirmed the facility had been hit.

While accurate information can be difficult to get out of this notoriously secretive regime, there are reportedly over 240 people trapped underground in Iran’s second largest nuclear facility.

Iranian officials out of Tehran believe the explosion was the result of sabotage.

Rumors of this being pulled off by Israel are already circulating. Israel has been an outspoken opponent of Iran becoming nuclear capable, and in 1981 Israel was able to dismantle Iraq’s nuclear program through a bombing raid — known as Operation Opera – on largely centralized, above ground facilities.

More at The Brenner Brief, and I will post updates here as I am able

UPDATE!! The Brenner Brief has an update

Earlier this morning, we reported on the apparent bombing of a nuclear facility inIranWe reported on this before many of the major news outlets, including having it up over 12 hours before Breitbart.com posted a link to another site.

Our contributor, Jason Blair, and The Brenner Brief have been questioned via social media today regarding the validity of this story. We stand behind the story, as other news outlets had then and have now reported on it. Of course, we do not have any direct assets in Iran, as only the government would in that closed society. However, several outlets, including reputable direct sources listed in those other stories, have proclaimed that this explosion did indeed take place and that a bombing, or sabotage, of some sort did occur.

So the question is, why isn’t the mainstream media reporting on the Iran bombing story? We have been asked this question in a manner to suggest that because the “MSM” isn’t reporting on it, it cannot be true. Perhaps this is the first story where we have truly done as our slogan suggests: “The Brenner Brief — rendering the mainstream media useless.”

We asked Blair his opinion on the MSM’s failure to report on this. We are not supporting a conspiracy theory and neither is Blair; however, we are thinking through the various reasons why this complete avoidance of the topic by mainstream media could be possible. Blair’s thoughts on the issue are as follows:

If the report is accurate, the explosion would have happened on Inauguration day. The media was focused on that and this topic really didn’t jive with what Obama was looking to push in his inaugural address.

Chuck Hagel, who is being floated for Secretary of Defense, is perceived as being weak on Iran. With this news coming so close to his confirmation there may be a push to try to hold it back from the public. At the same time, I would think those seeking to block his nomination would be leaking this out.

If Israel had anything to do with it, they have a track record of being pretty quiet about this kind of stuff, as seen in their 2007
bombing of a Syrian nuclear reactor.  Also important to note - President Bush refused to comment on it when he was confronted on this Operation in a press conference.

Drudge put out a story from yesterday that shows Israel is stepping back from plans on unilaterally attacking Iran. Could this be a reason?

I’m pretty sure Iran wants to keep this quiet. They have been stalling on nuclear talks, and this week suggested the talks be pushed out to February. Perhaps they’re a little pre-occupied?

I will post any updates I get

 

RIP General Norman Schwarzkopf

An American legend, he was 78

Truth is, retired Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf didn’t care much for his popular “Stormin’ Norman” nickname.

The seemingly no-nonsense Desert Storm commander’s reputed temper with aides and subordinates supposedly earned him that rough-and-ready moniker. But others around the general, who died Thursday in Tampa, Fla., at age 78 from complications from pneumonia, knew him as a friendly, talkative and even jovial figure who preferred the somewhat milder sobriquet given by his troops: “The Bear.”

That one perhaps suited him better later in his life, when he supported various national causes and children’s charities while eschewing the spotlight and resisting efforts to draft him to run for political office.

He lived out a quiet retirement in Tampa, where he’d served his last military assignment and where an elementary school bearing his name is testament to his standing in the community.

Schwarzkopf capped an illustrious military career by commanding the U.S.-led international coalition that drove Saddam Hussein’s forces out of Kuwait in 1991 — but he’d managed to keep a low profile in the public debate over the second Gulf War against Iraq, saying at one point that he doubted victory would be as easy as the White House and the Pentagon predicted.

Schwarzkopf was named commander in chief of U.S. Central Command at Tampa’s MacDill Air Force Base in 1988, overseeing the headquarters for U.S. military and security concerns in nearly two dozen countries stretching across the Middle East to Afghanistan and the rest of central Asia, plus Pakistan.

RIP

CAIR leader calls for destruction of Israel

Via Weasel Zippers

Via FPM:

The slogan, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” can be heard regularly from the shores of the Gaza Strip, emanating from members of terrorist groups, including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The river represents the Jordan River, and the sea is the Mediterranean – both sides of Israel. Essentially, this means the destruction of Israel.

Khaled Meshaal, the global head of Hamas, stated something similar, when he made his historic visit to Gaza this month. He said, “Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north.” Just one week previous to that, the leader of another Islamist group, Cyrus McGoldrick, repeated the slogan on Facebook and Twitter. Except he did not state it from the Middle East, he made it from the United States.

McGoldrick is the Civil Rights Manager and spokesman for the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations or CAIR-New York. The national organization of CAIR was founded in June 1994 as a part of the umbrella group created by then-global Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook. [Today, Marzook is the number two leader under Meshaal.] As well, CAIR was named a party to Hamas financing by the U.S. Justice Department for two federal trials against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). CAIR had asked people to donate money to the terrorist HLF charity via CAIR’s national website.

When fighting broke out between Hamas, who was firing hundreds of rockets into Israeli civilian neighborhoods, and Israel, who was responding to the Hamas fire by targeting terrorist infrastructure, McGoldrick didn’t flinch as to which side he was supporting. On November 12 on Twitter, he wrote,“Gaza under attack for the last few days. May G-d protect them [Hamas] and grant them victory.” Just two days earlier, McGoldrick had attended a CAIR banquet in Tampa, Florida. Just one day earlier, he had praised Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

On November 15, McGoldrick tweeted, “Palestine is a land occupied by foreign settlers. They [Hamas] have the right to resist, to defend themselves, ‘by any means necessary.’”

Islamist pig. Why does our government allow this group to operate here?

Rewarding incompetence has consequences

America chose, or at least enough Americans chose to reward President Obama with four more years last month. Many people, including me, were stunned considering the awful job on the economy the president had done. Fewer of us really pounded the foreign policy blunders and  missteps of this president. I tried to do as much as I could on the foreign policy side. After the first debate when Romney pounded the president, I was sure, just sure he would feast on the president’s handling of Benghazi in the next debate, he did not, nor did he in the third debate. In fact, the geniuses at Team Romney let Benghazi slide off the national stage rather than focusing on it even though every time some new information about Benghazi came out, Obama looked more dishonest and inept.

Well, whether that hurt Romney we may never really know, but, I do recall thinking to myself that the GOP had erred by not talking more. Now, it is too late to unseat Obama, and the media has tried to bury the story, as they were doing before the election. But, the news out of Libya just stinks more and more. And now, this morning, we get a glimpse of how Obama may have unwittingly armed the very terrorists that attacked in Benghazi. Stacy McCain notes that Obama has consequences, and not all of those consequences are economic.

Yes, and I’m sure it must have seemed like a great idea during the “Arab Spring” to arm Islamic extremists in Libya:

In spite of the threat of American weapons ending up in the hands of terrorist groups, President Barack Obama secretly approved an arms transfer to Libyan rebels through Qatar at the height of the rebellion against Moamar Khadhafi, a knowledgeable source noted on Friday.
However, American counterterrorists are discovering that some of those U.S. weapons ended up in the hands of radical Islamists including associates of al-Qaeda, according to a law enforcement source who trained police in the Middle East.
Some Americans who are retired from the military, as well as intelligence and law enforcement agencies, believe there should be an investigation into possible connections between the weapons provided by the Qataris back then and the attack that killed an American ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012.

More at Gateway Pundit: “Benghazi Terrorists Were Armed By Obama”

Leaders of nations can, and do make mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes can lead to unforeseen consequences. But arming radicals is especially dangerous and ill advised. I suppose what really stands out here is that during the “Arab Spring” the president has chosen to take the sides of the WRONG people, and not taken sides with the right people. Iranians rose up, and Obama was silent. In Egypt, Obama took sides with the Muslim Brotherhood. How is that working out for democracy? In Libya, Obama chose to get involved, and to arm extremists without weighing the consequences of who he was arming. We know how that worked out.

Yep, consequences do arise when we reward incompetence, if you do not believe me just look at Egypt, or Libya, or Iran, or the entire Middle East.

 

 

Just so we are VERY clear where this blog stands

Ed and I stand with our strongest ally, and the only free country in the Middle East

And I would note that Hamas, and Hezbollah ought to be eradicated because there will NEVER be peace as long as these swine exist.

The fact is that many have bought into lies told by Leftists and terrorists who wish to destroy Israel, a nation which only wants to be let alone and live in peace. Here are the FACTS you need to know

The State of Israel was created in a peaceful and legal process by the United Nations. It was not created out of Palestinian lands, but rather out of the Ottoman Empire, which had been ruled for 400 years by the Turks who lost it when they, fighting alongside Germany, were defeated in World War I. There were no “Palestinian” lands at the time because there were no people claiming to be Palestinians, but rather simply Arabs who lived in the region of Palestine.

It was only after World War I that the present states of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq were also created – also out of the Turkish Empire by the British and French victors. Jordan was created on about 80 percent of the Palestine Mandate, which was originally designated by the League of Nations as part of the Jewish homeland. Since then, Jews have been prohibited from owning property there.

In 1947, a UN partition plan mandated the creation of two states on the remaining 20 percent of the Palestine Mandate: the State of Israel for the Jews, and another state for the stateless Arabs. But the rulers of eight Arab states did not want a non-Arab state anywhere in the Middle East. Thus they rejected the UN arrangement and simultaneously launched a three-front war of annihilation against the newly created state of Israel — on the very day of its creation in 1948. Israel begged for peace and offered friendship and cooperation to its neighbors. The Arab dictators rejected this offer and answered it with a war, which they ultimately lost.

A state of war in the Middle East has continued uninterruptedly ever since, because most of the Arab states have refused to sign a peace treaty with Israel, and have refused to recognize the legitimacy of the Jewish state. To this day, the Arab states and the Palestinians refer to the failure of their effort to destroy Israel as Al-Nakba – The Catastrophe. What for one people was a joyous founding, was seen by the other as a disaster.

Had there been no invasion of Israel by Arab armies whose intent was overtly genocidal, there would have been a state of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza since 1948.

From 1949 to 1956, Egypt waged war against Israel, launching more than 9,000 attacks from terrorist cells set up in the refugee camps of the Gaza Strip. The 1956 “Sinai campaign” ended Egypt’s terror war, even though U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower forced Israeli Prime Minister Ben Gurion to return the Sinai to Egypt without a peace treaty.

But the Arab war continued on other fronts. In 1964, Yasser Arafat began a campaign of terror whose avowed goal was the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jews. Sponsored first by Kuwait, and later by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, and Iran, Arafat declared unending war against Israel until all of “Palestine” would be liberated, redeemed in “fire and blood.”

In 1967, Egypt, Syria and Jordan attacked Israel for a second time and were again defeated. It was in repelling these aggressors that Israel came to control the West Bank and the Gaza strip, as well as the oil-rich Sinai desert. Israel elected not to annex these territories it had captured from the aggressors, but neither did it withdraw its armies or relinquish its control over the region because the Arabs once again refused to make peace.

In 1973 the Arab armies again attacked Israel. This invasion was led by Syria and Egypt, abetted by Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and five other countries that gave military support to the aggressors. Israel again defeated the Arab forces. Afterwards, Egypt – and Egypt alone — agreed to make a formal peace.

In 1987 the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) initiated a violent, six-year Intifada (uprising) directed against Israeli soldiers and civilians alike, after false rumors of Israeli atrocities had circulated through Palestinian territories. During the first four years of the uprising, Palestinians carried out more than 3,600 Molotov cocktail attacks, 100 hand grenade attacks, and 600 assaults with guns or explosives. These actions resulted in the deaths of 16 Israeli civilians and 11 Israeli soldiers, in addition to the wounding of more than 1,400 Israeli civilians and 1,700 Israeli soldiers.

In 1993 the Oslo peace process was initiated, based on the pledge that both parties would renounce violence as a means of settling their disputes. But the Palestinians never followed through on this pledge. During the so-called “peace process” — between 1993 and 1999 – they perpetrated more than 4,000 terrorist attacks that resulted in the deaths of more than 1,000 Israelis. During this same period, Israel gave the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza a self-governing authority, a 40,000-man armed “police force,” and 95 percent of the territory their negotiators demanded. But Israel’s efforts to achieve peace were in vain. In 2000, the Palestinians officially launched a new, second Intifada against Israel, effectively terminating the peace process.

Adapted from: “Occupation and Settlement: The Myth and the Reality,” by David Meir-Levi (June 5, 2005), and “Why Israel Is the Victim and the Arabs Are the Indefensible Aggressors in the Middle East,” by David Horowitz (January 9, 2002)

More from Michael Medved

By the same token, when Israeli leaders declared their own independence in 1948, it represented a culmination of their nation-building efforts, not their initiation. More than 650,000 Jews already lived in a vibrant, dynamic, surprisingly cohesive civilization spread through several major cities (including the new metropolis of Tel Aviv, constructed on empty sand dunes in 1909) and scores of agricultural communities built on previously unoccupied land purchased from absentee owners. Intensive Jewish immigration began in the 1880s, more than two generations before independence, and produced distinctive political parties, labor unions, universities, newspapers, theater companies, and even symphony orchestras. This nation in formation also managed to defend itself against murderous Arab riots in 1921, 1929, 1936, and 1939, giving rise to the Haganah (“The Defense” in Hebrew), a militia that averaged 30,000 members over 30 years pre-independence, ultimately developing into the Israel Defense Forces. Like the Minutemen who gave rise to the Continental Army, these citizen soldiers fought a bloody struggle after formal independence, combating formidable foes determined to exterminate their new nation.

Greater care and clarity in describing the history of the conflict will encourage policymakers and the public to grasp its essential contours, and to recognize the absence of any real equivalence in the goals or strategies of the two sides.

Israel, in other words, wasn’t created by the U.N., the U.S. (which observed an arms embargo and provided no aid during the War of Independence), or any other outside agency. The nation grew from the patient, incremental, organic efforts of the Halutzim (pioneers) who risked everything to build a homeland for themselves and their posterity.

Nor did these efforts in any way “uproot” or “displace” Palestinian society. During the years of intensive immigration between World War I and World War II, the Jewish population west of the Jordan increased by 470,000 while the non-Jewish population swelled by 588,000. According to respected British census figures, the number of Palestinian Arabs exploded on the eve of Israeli independence, increasing 120 percent between 1922 and 1947. These figures prove that the rise of the Jewish state (with its greatly heightened economic development) drew more Palestinians into the area, rather than driving them away.

Palestinians became refugees only after fighting began in the War of Independence, especially after five Arab states with well-equipped armies invaded the fledgling Jewish state, pledged to achieve its total annihilation. Even then, in the midst of massive bloodshed and widespread violence, the Palestinian Arab population increased, rather than declining. In 1941, before Israeli independence and the claimed “uprooting” of Palestinians, 1,111,398 Arabs lived in what later became Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. Nine years later, after the turmoil of war and dislocation, that number had risen (slightly) to 1,162,100. By 1980 (with Israel controlling all territory west of the Jordan), the Palestinian numbers had nearly doubled, and they more than doubled again by 2005. Most recent figures show that the Palestinian population of Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank has increased by more than fivefold since independence and the flight of the famous refugees—hardly evidence of some ruthless program of ethnic cleansing.

Unfortunately, anti-Israel propagandists choose to ignore these facts and to distort history with misleading and manipulative language. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas recently wrote in The New York Times about the 1947 U.N. vote to partition the British Mandate into two states, one Israeli and one Palestinian. “Minutes after the State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948,” he notes, “the United States granted it recognition. Our Palestinian state, however, remains a promise unfulfilled.”

He neglects to mention that the Palestinian leaders themselves (led by the grand mufti of Jerusalem, a close Hitler ally during the war) rejected the U.N. partition and made no effort to set up a Palestinian state, either before or after the War of Independence. Between 1949 and 1967, Arabs (the Egyptians and Jordanians) controlled every inch of territory that Abbas now seeks for his new state—all of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. They could have established a Palestinian homeland at any point during those 18 years and, incidentally, continued denying Jews any access to their holy sites. With scant protest from Palestinians, the Arab states made no effort to “fulfill the promise” because they concentrated all their attention and effort on destroying Israel rather than building Palestine. They cared far more about expelling Jews than they did about re-settling Palestinians.

Go read the rest, and spread it around. stop the lies about Israel and “Palestine”. The fact is that Palestinians want to destroy Israel far more than they want peace with Da JOOOOS!

The Left’s childish obsession with “fairness”

If you follow politics at all you have noticed, no doubt, that Liberals are fixated on fairness. They argue for higher tax rates on higher income Americans because that satisfies their definition of fairness. Their fixation on racial “diversity” is also partly based on that word fairness. Their opposition to many, or sometimes all facets of Capitalism is also based on fairness. Their fixation on giving government the power to create “equality” is also largely based on fairness. For a Liberal, the idea that some have more money, or better housing, or are more successful is unfair, and therefore the government should do its best to eliminate that unfairness.

As I have watched Liberalism, and its more depraved ideological cousin Leftism over the years, I have noted the immaturity of many who buy into the folly of those twisted ideologies. I have said before that Liberalism is an ideology for the childish, and Liberals fixation on fairness is a great example of the truth of my position. Sometimes if you look closely at a Liberal arguing for the rich to pay higher taxes, you can see a small child, their tear-stained face contorted, as the they yell “that is not fair”. 

The past week or so, watching Israel defend itself against the terrorist barbarians of Hamas, I have noticed that “fairness” seems to be at the center of Liberal anger at Israel for defending itself. The argument from many Liberals goes like this. Israel is much stronger than Hamas militarily. Their weapons, their training, the fighting skills are so much better than those that Hamas’s are, so this fight is unfair. I have heard different versions of this idiotic mantra and they all are based on emotion rather than reason. I would love to talk to one of these fools, just once and ask this question. Have you, Mr. or Ms. Liberal, ever thought that maybe Hamas should stop picking a fight with Israel? I can only imagine what their response would be. But I would love to watch them actually have to think about that for a few seconds before they retreated back to the walls of their Liberal fantasy world where fairness is ordained by the United Nations and enforced by rainbow-colored unicorns that make everyone get along by passing out cotton candy.

 

Video- Anti-Israel protesters asked if Israel has a right to self-defense?

Via The Right Scoop

A mixture of ignorant fools who have no clue about what is really going on over there. These people have swallowed the Kool-Aid Hamas sells. Israel blocks no legitimate aid to Gaza, only weapons that they know will be used against Israel for example. And a mix of pro-terrorist scum as well. The most fascinating thing I keep hearing is that the fight is unfair because Israel has far better weapons or because the rockets Hamas fires are not really dangerous. I would like to ask these people if they would be OK with Israel defending itself if it used the same weapons as Hamas does. Their heads might explode if they actually had to think about that one.

 

Just another sign that the Democratic Party is a shallow hull of a party

Debbie Wasserman Schultz lies, it seems every time she opens her mouth. How does she do that? How can she, or any Democrat, continue to hold the ideological beliefs they hold knowing that they must LIE to support those beliefs? Yes, I know, I know, this is politics some would say. I say this is what is WRONG with politics. When the truth ceases to matter, when political big shots lie as a matter of course, then we, as a nation, are in deep trouble. People like Schultz are unfit to serve, they are like a cancer, eating away at America.

Via NRO:

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz seems to reside in a different reality than the rest of us. After the debate last night she said:

“What I was surprised about Greta, during the entire section of the debate on the Middle East, Mitt Romney didn’t bring up Israel once and I think it just shows he isn’t committed to Israel as he says he is and has really only used the issue as a political opportunity.”

The only problem for Wasserman Schultz is that a mere glance at the transcript of last night’s debate shows that Romney mentioned Israel eleven times.

This one ought to make you think

 

From Black and Right

In watching the unfolding misunderstanding in the Middle East, I now fully understand the wise words initially issued that in part read,

“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”

My question is why won’t Christians in the United States show the restraint now being displayed by believers in the Middle East?

While I am personally God-fearing, I don’t belong to an organized religion in the United States that can range in size from the mom-and-pop to the small corporation. What does bother me are the thin skins of Christians worldwide who take to the streets in murderous hordes whenever anyone expressing free speech makes any kind of statement or gesture that offends their religious feelings.

We should all be inspired by the restraint shown by those in other religions whose tenants are under constant attack and ridicule and respond with kindness and prayer.

We should also condemn the acts of Christians, especially in the United States for their stiffening attempts to create a theocracy, where all are forced to become Christian and any attempt to flee that theocracy can be met with imprisonment or even violent death.

How dare we, for example, treat our women as second-class citizens under the name of Christianity. When are we, as a so-called civilized nation, going to end of oppression in the name of the Bible? In many countries around the world, women are free to pursue happiness in any way they choose, unlike here as we’re constantly reminded by our more enlightened progressives, where we continue a “war on women”.

Be sure to read the rest folks, it speaks volumes about how the Left and its sick obsession with “equality” never allows it to see the facts right in front of their faces.

 

It took Joe Klein a long time to become this stupid

Via Gateway Pundit

Klein insists that Israel is trying to “push us” into war. No, Israel is trying to survive. And, I would remind Klein that Iran will not hesitate to strike Israel, and us if at all possible. I might also remind him that Iran will USE nukes if they get the capability to, and that will cause an even BIGGER war, and will likely cost many more lives. 

*VIDEOS* Remember Obama’s War?

PART 1

PART 2

PART 3

Libya is now controlled by Islamofascists, a scourge far more sickening and deranged than Muammar Qaddafi’s regime ever was, and one which is already proving to be yet another destabilizing force in the Middle East.

THANKS BARACK!

For those who will say that there is no difference in Romney and Obama…..

You need to understand that, as Zion’s Trumpet says 

It is Very Simple: Romney Supports Israel and Obama Does Not and Never Has and Never Will.

Yep! there is no doubt that there is a massive difference between the two men on Israel. We have seen what Obama really thinks of Israel and that is totally unacceptable.

Why “Progressives”are really REgressives

Robert has a great dissection of what I am going to call the Cult of Progressivism and their war on American energy independence, the American economy, and ultimately our entire republican form of government

So Obama called Democrat senators and lobbies to get a bill killed that would have kicked the XL pipeline into gear. Not real surprising since “Duh Won” really doesn’t want us off of the “Middle East Oil”…. It’s a great talking point for the Progressives when speaking of green energy. But the real fact is they don’t want oil at all.

Robert is perfectly correct here. The Left wants us “off”Middle Eastern oil,ONLY if that means we move to their utopian vision of a “green” world. A world that may or may not ever really come to be. The fact is that if wind, water, and solar power were feasible to meet America’s energy needs, they would be doing  it now. Yet,the Left insists on living in their alternate universe.

Pelosi, Obama, Reid, The entire DEMOCRAT leadership and minions blamed GWB for high gas prices when gas was 3.00. It’s 4.40 today here. And it’s NOT OBAMA’S FAULT?…

In 06 the Democrats took over both houses of Congress, ANWAR and other OIL EXPLORATION plans were SHELVED when the houses switched majority’s. SO WHO IS AT FAULT?

The fact is that the Left is only offended by high fuel prices if private oil companies make big profits, which are, according to Progressive doctrine, evil. The Left LOVES high fuel prices when those prices are inflated by taxes. No matter that high fuel prices hurt the working Americans, you know, the folks Progressives always claim to be fighting for. No matter that killing the XL or not allowing offshore drilling, or drilling in ANWAR kills tens of thousands of jobs that would be of great help to those same “working Americans”. That kind of progress, REAL progress, progress that would greatly reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and boost our economy, is of no interest to the Progressive.

Please remember this the next time you hear a Democrat squawking about getting off foreign oil.

 

Obama the anti-military president?

The question begs to be asked doesn’t it? In fact, I am ashamed to say that there really is no question anymore, like they say, actions speak louder than words.

You have to give President Obama credit. It takes serious gall to tell the American military to its face that you are putting it on the road to second-class status.

That’s exactly what our commander-in-chief did at the Pentagon yesterday, as he announced nearly half a trillion dollars in new spending cuts, after already chopping $480 billion during his first three years in office. He also set out plans for drastic reductions in our force size and continuing weapons programs, including the F-35 fighter — our last best hope for maintaining American dominance in the skies.

Obama’s been trying to reassure Americans all this won’t endanger our national security or our strategic interests. Everyone in or out of uniform who’s free to speak knows better — and that with a full-scale war still underway we are standing on the brink of our weakest military posture since Jimmy Carter, and our smallest forces since before World War II.

No one could be so foolish as to believe that these cuts will not harm our national security, no one. No one could ever argue seriously that this will not cost our world standing, nor could anyone make the case that we no longer need to be able to fight two wars at the same time.

Part of Obama’s rationale is his declared belief that America no longer needs to have a military big enough to fight two wars at once — even though that’s been our historical experience more often than not (think the European and the Pacific theaters in World War II, Vietnam and the Cold War with Russia, Iraq and Afghanistan).

More important, President Obama doesn’t understand that our military’s role isn’t just fighting wars. It’s providing a strong strategic presence that will influence events in our favor — and away from that of adversaries and rivals. Even he admits these drastic cuts can only come through shrinking that presence world-wide, which means deep cuts in our forces in Europe and the Middle East, while expecting a shrinking navy (which could wind up with barely 230 ships by 2020) and air force to keep our interests safe in the Pacific region — where China is surging.

Go read the rest, if you can stand to. Frankly, I came away so angry and disgusted that I could barely read it all myself.

Not content with repeatedly kicking American businesses in the nuts, no longer content with using the EPA as a weapon against our domestic energy development, Obama has now decided to gut our military.

Common sense, and history tell us that this will come to no good, no good at all. But, once more a committed Leftist administration somehow sees weakening our national defense as a good thing for humanity. And, to be blunt, I cannot think of a more committed Leftist than Obama. Certainly we have never had a president as committed to Leftist ideals as Obama have we? FDR? Carter? Wilson? Maybe, but Obama will take a back seat to none.

And again, the desperate need to re-take the Senate, and the White House this November is so clearly illustrated.