07 December 2010

Pearl Harbor, Never Forget

Today is December 7th, the 69th anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. "A date", like Franklin D. Roosevelt announced, "which will live in infamy".

But this is old news. Most veterans of World War II are dead (those who aren't should live and be well for a long time), the United States is good friends with Japan - why do we still care about December 7th? Because we haven't learned the lessons of Pearl Harbor.

There is a new Pearl Harbor visitor's center that has been built to commemorate that fateful day. One Pearl Harbor veteran, Durrell Conner is there to be a part of the memorial proceedings and understands the lessons to be learned.
Conner hopes the new center will help the public remember the lessons of Dec. 7, particularly the need to be prepared.

"For anything that might happen. There are a lot of people that don't like us and would like to see us destroyed. We have to keep alert all the time," he said.

Mr. Conner is exactly right. There are people out there that "don't like us and would like to see us destroyed." Next September, the United States will commemorate our own Pearl Harbor, the attacks of 9/11, almost a decade ago. An attack that murdered more Americans than were murdered at Pearl Harbor.

Have we learned anything from the attack on Pearl Harbor? Or is this a commemoration of an event long past that has no real relevance to our lives today. I'm not sure we have learned the lessons. We see at the airport that all Americans are treated as terrorists wanna-bees. And if you complain about why a nun is pulled over for extra screening, while Muslim males between the ages of 18-40 paying cash for a one-way airplane ticket are free to fly, you are called a bigot and a racist. Does this make sense?

Obviously, our Pearl Harbor veterans "get it". We've already had our equivalent attack just a decade ago... have we already forgotten?

30 November 2010

News Not Fit to Print?

Borrowing a famous phrase... All the News that's Fit to Print - did any of these stories make it to the Mainstream Media?

Let's begin with the good news.
A daughter to one of the royal families in the Persian Gulf is in Israel undergoing a complicated heart operation, according to Knesset Member Ayoub Kara.

The royal patient insisted on undergoing the procedure here - after her doctors recommended one of Israel's leading hospitals as the best place to undergo the operation. For security and other reasons, the name of the hospital has not been published....

The woman's husband, a prince of the unnamed Gulf kingdom himself, is considered a key figure in his country. He told MK Kara that if – and hopefully, when – his wife recovers, he plans to lobby for construction of a large medical center that will take in patients from around the Arab world – with Israeli doctors helping to set up the project. In a statement, MK Kara's sees medicine as an important bridge to bring Israel and the Arab world closer, “especially given the fact that in recent years more and more Arabs have been exposed to Israeli medicine, and are well aware of the high quality of Israeli medicine.”

Commenting on the story, MK Kara said that “this is another humanitarian gesture that displays the true values of the State of Israel. Incidents like help bring peace closer than the last 10 years of peace talks did; peace is made not with a piece of paper, but with positive human relations between nations."

This is news that I like to hear. Israel leading the way in medical research and treating those in need. I must agree with Minister Kara where he says that "peace is made not with a piece of paper, but with positive human relations between nations." Peace is not about giving away parts of Israel in order to gain recognition and theoretical peace from her Arab neighbors (blackmail) - peace is created when two mutual parties recognize that there are mutual benefits to living next to each other in trust and recognition of the good done for each other. This is a wonderful step in the right direction.

In a step in the wrong direction, Israel's "peace partner", the Palestinian Authority headed by the "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas has decided to honor the planner of the 1972 Olympics Israeli Athletes Massacre.
Abbas, who worked behind the scenes to fund the murder of 11 Israelis at Munich, earlier this year told American Jewish leaders he would halt incitement and the encouragement of violence against Jews. One month later Abbas praised Abu Daoud, the mastermind of the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972 who died this year.

At last week’s Fatah’s Revolutionary Council meeting, Abbas sat at the head table in front of a poster of Amin al-Hindi, one of the senior planners of the terrorist attack that shocked the world but not enough to stop Olympic officials from continuing with the Games despite the massacre.

The Fatah meeting officially was held in honor of “the Shahid (Martyr) commander Amin Al-Hindi,” according to Palestinian Media Watch... Last August, the official PA daily described al-Hindi's participation in the Olympic massacre, saying he was "one of the stars who sparkled... at the sports stadium in Munich." The attack itself was referred to as "just one of many shining stations" in his life.

I must wonder how it's possible to create anything that resembles respect let alone peace. Peace is only an option when the two parties respect each other. Memorializing and honoring people who murdered Jews in cold blood, then turning around and speaking about peace and understanding is a sick joke. Somehow Israel is supposed to ignore such acts and pretend that they didn't happen - that these are people to be reckoned with and taken seriously? It is beyond me to understand.

And in surprise news... although I'm not sure what the shocker here is:
Iran shipped arms and troops to Hezbollah in 2006 using ambulances! Wow, I can't believe it. Aren't ambulances supposed to be sacred? Aren't they supposed to only be used for saving lives? Shockingly, no - and if you believe it... I'm not sure where you've been (or where the media has been). Ambulances have been used by Arab terrorists to transport weapons for years.

It's too bad that the Media as a whole doesn't bother to do their research. A quick jaunt through the newspapers of the world and a little bit of reading goes a long way to understanding what's going on in the Middle East. It's incredible how the Media is focused on the issue of "settlements" when in truth it is clear that mutual respect is the most basic building block to actual, real peace rather than blackmail and murder. Most would see this as common sense, but as we know - common sense isn't that common and you won't be finding it in the Media.

18 November 2010

Canadian PM: I Will Defend Israel 'whatever the cost'

This is part of the speech that Prime Minister Stephen Harper gave on November 8, 2010 in Ottawa to a gathering of international parliamentarians and experts attending a conference on combating anti-Semitism.

Please read the full text of Prime Minister Harper's speech here.

17 November 2010

"Don't Touch My Junk"

We're being punished for TSA/government failures to to keep us safe - and the refusal to ethnically and behaviorally profile people. It's not like we don't know who we are looking for.

Excellent articles:
Airport Body Scanners Violate Muslim Law, Muslims Say - USA Today
Our Security and the TSA - Talya Drissman
Napolitano: The Ball's in My Court Now - Ann Coulter
Terrorists Hiding in Hijabs - The Washington Times
The 'Israelification' of Airports: High Security, Little Bother - The Star (Toronto)

I wrote about this before: Breasts of Death - The article is about how breast implants are another possible place for female terrorists to hide explosives, but there's an additional problem. Assuming that these Muslim women will even go through the body scanners - the scanners will identify that they have implants, but not what the implants are filled with. I do not believe that there will show a difference between silicon and PETN (an explosive). The "enhanced" pat-down will certainly not discover it either.

Video: How Israel Screens for Terrorists - Wall Street Journal

Political correctness will be the death of us if we do not take defensive measures. It's time to deal in reality - and stop this nonsense. We know who the enemy is - does the government?

11 November 2010

Veterans Day/Remembrance Day

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. -John Stewart Mill

In Flanders Fields by John McCrae, May 1915
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

Please take the time today and every day to honor and thank a veteran for their sacrifice.
Take a look at the sidebar if you would like to support an veterans organization.

10 November 2010

Semper Fidelis - Always Faithful

Happy 235th Birthday to the United States Marine Corps. Congratulations to the best of the best.

31 October 2010

The Goose and the Gander

The New York Times has brought to our attention the question of Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish state.
Many Jews in Israel and beyond consider it essential that they are recognized not just as members of a religion but also as a people with historic rights to a sovereign state in the Holy Land. The issue, they say, goes to the core of the conflict and will serve as a litmus test for Palestinian intentions.

"Only when our peace partners are willing to recognize the legitimacy of the Jewish state," Mr. Netanyahu said... "will they truly be prepared to end the conflict and make a lasting peace with Israel."

But given the opposition to this demand by the Palestinians and many of Israel's own Arab citizens, some are questioning how vital it is.

By removing the "Jewish" from the Jewish-democratic identity of the State of Israel, serious questions arise - does this negate the historical claim the Jews have to the Land? Does this create the impression that the only reason Israel exists is because the United Nations gave it status in 1948?

To answer both questions - yes, and yes again. It removes the 3000 year connection the Jewish People have with the Land and relegates it to the status of any other country established by the United Nations.

The modern State of Israel was established as the Jewish homeland. Israel's Declaration of Independence begins:
Eretz-Israel [Land of Israel] was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained to statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books.

After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people kept faith with it throughout their Dispersion and never ceased to pray and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of their political freedom.

Impelled by this historic and traditional attachment, Jews strove in every successive generation to re-establish themselves in their ancient homeland...

This brings us to question in a quid pro quo - in other words, what's good for the goose is good for the gander - If we are allowed to question the Jewish identity and claim to the Land in the name of "peace" than surely we can question the "Palestinian" identity and claim to the Land as well.

The Arabs claim an "historic Arab Palestine", while at the same time are unable to recognize an ancient Jewish empire. Let us deal with this claim first. When did the "historic Arab Palestine" exist? Where were its borders? Who were its leaders? What kind of culture did those 'ancient' Palestinians have? What kind of political system did they have? This "historic Arab Palestine" never existed.

The beginning of the Palestinian issue begins way back during ancient Roman times. When the Romans conquered the Jews in 70 CE (Common Era/AD) and destroyed the Temple, the Romans still had problems with the Jewish People. The Jewish People were not willing to give up their Land without a fight. So finally in 135 CE, the Romans had enough. They wiped out the stronghold of Masada, and gave the Holy Land the new name of "Palestine", named after the Greek Philistines of Bible fame, and scattered the Jews across the world. The new "slave name" was created to break the connection that the Jews had with their homeland and destroy the Jews as a People. As 2000 years has shown us, Rome is gone and Israel is back. However, the "slave name" stuck.

After WWI, the "Palestine" Mandate was given to the British to administer. It consisted of the current countries of both Israel and Jordan, and both Arabs and Jews had the "Palestinian" identity stamped into their passports from 1917-1948.

In 1922, Arab-"Palestine" was split off from the Mandate and re-named Trans-Jordan and the only "Palestine" left on the map referred to area of Israel. The "Palestinians" of Jordan became Jordanians.

In 1948, Israel declared independence and the Jewish and Arab "Palestinians" became Israelis. That would make sense of course, but this is the Middle East. Not all the Arabs of Jewish-"Palestine" decided to take Israel's offer to become Israelis, instead they created a new "nation" - the "Palestinian People", whose land was usurped by the Jews.

The point of all this is to prove two points:
* First, there is no "Palestinian People" who have a claim on the Land of Israel.
* Second, the attempt to break the connection between the Jewish People and the Land of Israel is not a new one. It's been tried before - by the Romans.

This connection defies time. If Israel were not important to the Jewish People - we could have turned our backs years ago and said it wasn't worth the blood that we have shed over the millennium. We haven't.

Why is Israel being pressured to stop building on Jewish Land? Why do we hope that the "Palestinians" recognize us as a Jewish State? Why do we care about a people who are unwilling to make peace for the sake of peace without conditions attached?

It is unfathomable to be in "negotiations" with anyone holding a proverbial gun to our heads. We don't have to recognize them as a "People" with any legitimate claim to the Land - they don't have one. The Jewish connection is the one that exists. It's time for these "Palestinians" to find somewhere else to live. It's as simple as that.

26 October 2010

Rob Ford, New Mayor of Toronto

Yesterday the voters of Toronto made their vote count - they put Rob Ford in charge of their city. What's fascinating is the slogan that he used: Respect for Taxpayers. It's basic and highlights the feelings of Torontonians about the use of their money by city officials. The next four years will be fun to watch.

A Look Back at the Rob Ford Victory

04 October 2010

It might be a duck... or a terrorist in a suit

It's being reported that Mideast "peace" talks are being suspended by Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian Authority. The reason being given is that Israel will not extent its settlement building freeze. Mind you, these "settlements" are those that would be included in Israel "proper" if an Arab state is established on the lands of Judea/Samaria (aka West Bank).

Instead, the PA is thinking about opening talks with the well established terrorist organization Hamas in the Gaza Strip. If the Palestinians are supposed to be the "moderates" and Hamas are the "extremists" what does this tell us?

Are the "moderates" of the Palestinian Authority and the "extremists" of Hamas different than each other? In what way? Hamas is clear - Israel must be destroyed. The PA claims it only wants a state. Is the creation of another Arab state just a stepping stone toward the destruction of Israel?

Looking at the Palestinian Authority's revised charter we have to wonder if anything has really changed. While the terms "Israel", "Zionist" and other similar words are no longer included in the charter - it begins with these statements:
Revolution is our path to freedom, independence, and construction
It is a revolution until victory

It goes on to say:
This internal charter has been adopted within the framework of adherence to the provisions of the Basic Charter.

In reality, this "new" Palestinian Charter is an addendum to the Basic Charter - which includes the destruction of Israel.
Article (19) Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.

How is this different from from the new charter?
You must prepare yourself to inspire the spirit of organized revolutionary work in every Arab soul that is sincere to Palestine and that believes in its liberation. Let us train ourselves to be patient and to face ordeals, bear calamities, sacrifice our souls, blood, time and effort.

Fatah is the armed wing of the Palestinian Authority. We see what their interests are by their symbol.

Their background includes a map of the whole of Israel - not the so called West Bank or just the Gaza Strip. Of course the additions of the machine guns and a grenade are nice touches.

The Hamas charter is not much different from the PA Basic Charter.
The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.... There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad.... "I swear by the holder of Mohammed's soul that I would like to invade and be killed for the sake of Allah, then invade and be killed, and then invade again and be killed." (As related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).

Take a look at the Hamas flag.

Compare the Hamas and the PA flags - both have the whole of Israel on their flags. Both believe that "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free". Both believe in jihad and "liberation" through the murder of Jews.

Tell me again what differentiates the "moderates" from the "extremists" exactly?

16 September 2010

The False God of Peace

The siren song calls out - calling out for the blood on the alter of Peace. The god of Peace must be placated, no matter the cost. Blood may be spilled, in the name of Peace. No matter, the god of Peace must have his sacrifices. They may be old, they may be young, they may be still in the womb - but they are human sacrifices - all in the name of Peace.

Such a Peace is false god - a god that we have been warned not to follow.

As rockets continue to rain on southern Israel - those today containing phosphorous in order to burn as well as murder - we continue to sacrifice to Peace.

Some claim a difference between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority - but there is no such difference. Hamas does not accept the legitimacy of Israel's existence and neither does Mahmoud Abbas aka Abu Mazen. Abbas/Mazen will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
Abbas reportedly said that his position is no different from those Arafat present in previous negotiations, and that his staff is the same as Arafat's.

I'm glad Abbas/Mazen clarified it for us. He is continuing the work of Yassir Arafat. The same Yassir Arafat who in South Africa 1994 is quoted as saying after he signed one of many agreements,
"This has to be understood for everybody and for this I was insisting before signing to have a letter from them, the Israelis, that Jerusalem is one of the items which has to be under discussion and not the state, the permanent State of Israel! No! It is the permanent State of Palestine [applause]. Yes, it is the permanent State of Palestine....

What they are saying is that [Jerusalem] is their capital. No, it is not their capital. It is our capital. It is the first shrine of the Islam and the Moslems.

This agreement, I am not considering it more than the agreement which had been signed between our prophet Mohammed and Koraish, and you remember the Caliph Omar had refused this agreement and [considered] it a despicable truce.

[Ed. note: The agreement with Koraish allowed Mohammed to pray in Mecca, which was under Koraish control, for ten years. When Mohammed grew stronger two years later, he abrogated the agreement, slaughtered the tribe of Koraish and conquered Mecca.]

But Mohammed had accepted it and we are accepting now this peace offer. But to continue our way to Jerusalem..."

It doesn't get much better than that. Arafat was referencing a "peace treaty" Mohammed ultimately broke once it was no longer in his advantage to keep. Arafat didn't recognize Israel as legitimate at all - no worries about it being a "Jewish" state either. And Jerusalem? Not Jewish.

There is no peace to be had with either the Palestinian Authority or Hamas. The false god of Peace must no longer be sacrificed to. Those alters must be destroyed. Negotiations must end.

As Jews have entered the High Holy Days of Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur - we announce to ourselves and the World:
HaShem Hu HaElokim ... G-d, He is the King
and we must remember, Ein Od Milvado ... there is no one else but Him.

It's time to remember who we are - the Jewish People.
It's time to remember our King - the One G-d of the Jewish People.
We serve no other.


31 August 2010

The Price for "Peace"

Here we go again. On the eve of "peace talks" two Jewish men and two Jewish women (one pregnant) have just been murdered on Israeli roads by Arab terrorists, presumably in order to "derail" these talks.

Mahmoud Abbas (aka terrorist Abu Mazen) has over the last few years repeatedly complained of Israeli settlements being *the* obstacle to peace. Meanwhile Hamas rockets have been flying into Israeli airspace and slamming into homes and schools.

Let us take a moment to reflect on this information. I believe I must be confused again - perhaps someone can enlighten me.

* 4000 year history linking the Jewish People to the Land of Israel - this includes the areas of Judea/Samaria (West Bank).
* The State of Israel is a recognized country by the United Nations (not that I'm a fan of the UN).
* The State of Israel is under attack by U.S. State Department labeled terrorist organizations - ie. Hamas, Hezbollah.
* The citizens of Israel are under attack by the Palestinian Authority and Fatah as well as Hamas and Hezbollah.

Israel is the one always looking for a real peace with her neighbors - why? Why does it fall on Israel to make peace? The Palestinian Authority and Fatah don't want it. Hamas doesn't want it. Hezbollah doesn't want it.

The basic question is - Israel has been perpetually under attack by those who do not believe in her existence in any form... shouldn't the burden of proof that they want real peace be on the people who attack Israel?

Israel has no responsibility to even attempt to make peace with those who have yet to show good faith - there's nothing new here. More talks about Israel making "concessions" in the name of peace. What concessions have the Arabs made? I have yet to see them.

Israel and the Jewish People have paid the price of peace yet again today. We have lost another four members of our family - what have we gained?

Must read: Lives - Not Statistics

25 July 2010

The 'Audacity of Hope' and the U.S. Constitution

Aid boat seeks to sail as 'Audacity of Hope'

A group calling itself U.S. Boat to Gaza is seeking $370,000 in the next month to send an aid ship to the Gaza Strip that would be named after President Obama's best-selling book "The Audacity of Hope."

Rashid Khalidi, a friend of Obama who is active in Palestinian causes, has signed the appeal, part of a broader effort to thwart the Israeli blockade of the Hamas-controlled Palestinian enclave.

Khalidi, a Columbia University professor, briefly became the subject of controversy during the 2008 presidential campaign when Sen. John McCain's camp tried to make an issue of what it called Obama's suspect friendships. The news of Khalidi's involvement in the boat appeal has led the National Review to call for a Justice Department probe of the academic on grounds he may have provided material support to a terrorist group.

The White House declined to comment. Khalidi said he was not aware the boat would be named after Obama's book when he agreed to add his name to the list of sponsors.

"But if the name is a problem for the administration, it can simply insist publicly that Israel lift the siege: end of problem, end of embarrassment," he wrote in an e-mail.

This is a brilliant publicity move by Khalidi to force Obama's hand on the "Palestinian issue". We know that Obama was a supporter of the "cause" back in Chicago and has continued his support by having advisors on the issue. We will see what happens when Audacity sails.

What's also interesting but not picked up by the media is that while the infamous Turkish "aid" ship was running the Gaza blockade, the United States Supreme Court was delivering their decision about sending aid to other known terrorist organizations, "Partiya Karkeran Kurdistan (PKK) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which aim to establish independent states for, respectively, Kurds in Turkey and Tamils in Sri Lanka". The issue before the court was whether sending aid to these organizations would be protected under the First Amendment free speech clause. Both these groups have been labeled terrorist organizations by the U.S. State Department. The entire opinion is worth reading. The following quote is from the syllabus of the opinions.
It is a federal crime to “knowingly provid[e] material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization.” 18 U. S. C. §2339B(a)(1). The authority to designate an entity a “foreign terrorist organization” rests with the Secretary of State, and is subject to judicial review. “[T]he term ‘material support or resources’ means any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (1 or more individuals who may be or include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious materials.” §2339A(b)(1).... Whether foreign terrorist organizations meaningfully segregate support of their legitimate activities from support of terrorism is an empirical question. Congress rejected plaintiffs’ position on that question when it enacted §2339B, finding that “foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activity are so tainted by their criminal conduct that any contribution to such an organization facilitates that conduct.” §301(a), 110 Stat. 1247, note following §2339B. The record confirms that Congress was justified in rejecting plaintiffs’ view. The PKK and the LTTE are deadly groups. It is not difficult to conclude, as Congress did, that the taint of their violent activities is so great that working in coordination with them or at their command legitimizes and furthers their terrorist means. Moreover, material support meant to promote peaceable, lawful conduct can be diverted to advance terrorism in multiple ways. The record shows that designated foreign terrorist organizations do not maintain organizational firewalls between social, political, and terrorist operations, or financial firewalls between funds raised for humanitarian activities and those used to carry out terrorist attacks.

Chief Justice Roberts goes on to even bring Hamas into his opinion,
Material support meant to “promot[e] peaceable, lawful conduct,” Brief for Plaintiffs 51, can further terrorism by foreign groups in multiple ways. “Material support” is a valuable resource by definition. Such support frees up other resources within the organization that may be put to violent ends. It also importantly helps lend legitimacy to foreign terrorist groups legitimacy that makes it easier for those groups to persist, to recruit members, and to raise funds—all of which facilitate more terrorist attacks...“[I]nvestigators have revealed how terrorist groups systematically conceal their activities behind charitable, social, and political fronts.” M. Levitt, Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad 2– 3 (2006). “Indeed, some designated foreign terrorist organizations use social and political components to recruit personnel to carry out terrorist operations, and to provide support to criminal terrorists and their families in aid of such operations.” McKune Affidavit, App. 135, ¶11; Levitt, supra, at 2 (“Muddying the waters between its political activism, good works, and terrorist attacks, Hamas is able to use its overt political and charitable organizations as a financial and logistical support network for its terrorist operations”).

How is what was decided in Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project not being connected to the ships attempting to bring supplies to Gaza? These "activists" - especially any Americans - should be prosecuted for bringing material support to a U.S. State Department declared terrorist organization. There is no difference between one terrorist and another - it is illegal to support any of them. A murderer is a murderer, no matter how infamous the 'cause'. I am glad to see the Supreme Court clarify this issue. It would be fun to watch if the 'Audacity' would have the audacity to leave from the United States with material support for Hamas - would Holder, who prosecuted this case, go after them with this ruling? It would be nice to think he would, but that would be wishful thinking on my part.

US to Gaza: A Charade That Must be Stopped

15 July 2010

Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?

What ever happened to "charity begins at home"?

It seems that liberal leaders are so busy spending everyone else's money that they forget this famous axiom.

Everyone knows about President Obama's African half-brother who lives in a shack on less than a dollar a month. And let's not forget his aunt who lived in the United States public housing illegally until she gained asylum under undisclosed reasons.

In relatively new news we find out about former President Bill Clinton's niece Macy Clinton living on food stamps. Her infamous father, Roger Clinton, owes her thousands of dollars in child support going back over years of non-payment.

Both liberal leaders - the Obamas and the Clintons are millionaires. I do not begrudge them their money - I just wonder if these leaders could spare a dime to support their own flesh and blood.

Both the Clintons and Obamas say they care about the 'good of the people'. Words are cheap - let's see those words put into action.

14 July 2010

Good Luck to the Unarmed Homeowner

Oakland, California is in trouble - more specifically the citizens of Oakland are in a lot of trouble.
Oakland's police chief is making some dire claims about what his force will and will not respond to if layoffs go as planned.

Chief Anthony Batts listed exactly 44 situations that his officers will no longer respond to and they include grand theft, burglary, car wrecks, identity theft and vandalism. He says if you live and [sic] Oakland and one of the above happens to you, you need to let police know on-line.

Fascinating stuff. It means that the homeowner is on his own, and criminals know it. Say 'good-bye' to your car - don't worry, you can report the theft on-line. Vandalism? Minor stuff. Don't have email? Oh well.

Burglary? This one worries me a bit. Does this mean that if a criminal is breaking into your home you should sit back and let him take your stuff? Should you show him around the house pointing out the valuables? What about your personal safety?

Gun control advocates always speak of the police always being around to save you in case of trouble. In this case we see this isn't true. What adds salt to the wound is that California has very tight restrictions on gun ownership. What are homeowners supposed to do to protect themselves and their families?

I wish the citizens of Oakland much luck. They're going to need it.

21 June 2010

Flotilla Stupidity

This editorial showed itself in The Star in Toronto. Unfortunately I have seen these musings in other places, but this lady really went overboard in her article.

This was my response which I sent in, but was not published by the paper.
Re: McQuaig: Partner in Flotilla ‘Farce’
June 15, 2010

For those who enjoy fiction more than fact, your newspaper is a wonderful read. For one of your columnists to confuse right with wrong, fact with falsehood, with such unabashed enthusiasm makes me wonder in what world she lives.

The Palestinians of Gaza made a poor electoral choice some years ago when they overwhelmingly elected Hamas to rule. Following that election, Israel found itself under the attack of thousands of rockets coming from Gaza. Due to the situation, Israel placed a blockade on the Strip to try to stem the weapon flow into the area.

However, despite the blockade, Israel still continues to allow 15,000 tons of humanitarian aid into Gaza each week. I am quite interested to understand how this compares to the Palestinians throwing the wheelchair-bound 69 year old Mr. Klinghoffer off the Achille Lauro without mercy in 1985.

The “peace activists” of the ships bound for Gaza included 40 Al-Qaeda members as well as Hamas members. I have no doubt why Al-Jazeera whom Ms. McQuaig was quick to quote neglected to mention these upstanding members of society. I do wonder, however, how carefully Ms. McQuaig researched her article.

Let us be clear. An accomplice to a murder may as well be a murderer. Those “peaceful activists” providing supplies to a terrorist organization may as well be card-carrying members themselves, and some of them were. Hamas is recognized by the world as a terrorist organization, and those truly concerned with peace would be best served staying far away from being their accomplices.

Real Home Security

Now that Brinks home security has changed its company name to Broadview I have been inundated by their very irritating commercials advertising their name change. The reason that these commercials are irritating is because they portray a very unrealistic situation. The situation usually portrays the homeowner (a woman) having their home being broken into - but the criminal is scared off by the Brinks/Broadview alarm. The phone rings a moment later with a Brinks/Broadview agent calling to see if the homeowner is okay.

This situation is not only unrealistic, it is also unsafe.

Read my full opinion - here.

27 May 2010

Memorial Day

This coming Monday, May 31st is Memorial Day. The day we remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice for freedom.

In addition to going to the beach and barbecuing the hot dogs, take a moment to understand the true solemn meaning of the day.

Freedom is never free, and thousands of American soldiers over the years have given their lives to bring freedom and defend freedom here in the United States and around the world.

In honor of Memorial Day do something to honor those who have fallen. Find a local military cemetery and volunteer to help keep it weed-free. Place flowers on graves left unremembered. Find out what you can do to help veterans today.

Rather than let this day go unnoticed and pass by as just another 3 day weekend, please do your part to remember those who have given you the most precious gift of all, freedom.

History of Memorial Day
American Battle Monuments Commission
Arlington National Cemetery
2010 Memorial Day Ceremonies

17 May 2010

Second Amendment Links

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. - 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

I just wanted to direct everyone's attention to a list of 2nd Amendment links that I have posted on the sidebar. This is not a comprehensive list by any stretch. These are some of the national organizations that have been active in the fight against gun control. There are many local organizations that are also quite active (though not listed here) - it's important to be involved in both. Take a look through the list and please take a moment to check out the various websites.

12 May 2010

Happy Jerusalem Day! Yom Yerushalayim!

Today is the day we celebrate the liberation of the Western Wall, and Jerusalem from Jordanian hands. From 1948-1967, Jews were unable to visit the holiest site in Judaism.

We must also remember on this day the liberation of Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem, and the liberation of Hebron, where the Jewish Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and Matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Leah and Rachel) are buried. Jews were also unable to pray at their graves up until 1967.

We must understand that if there is to be religious freedom at any location in Israel - those places must stay in Israeli hands. There is no freedom of religion under Muslim rule.

07 May 2010

Does the United States need Israel?

The more I have thought about the current situation that Israel finds itself, vis-a-vis the United States, the more I realize that we need to re-examine the relationship.

Not so long ago the world had two super-powers trying to outmaneuver each other; trying to gain footholds in various places around the world; using proxies to fight the hot wars in order to avoid all out conflict. This is no longer the world we live in - that world no longer exists.

Instead, the United States is the only existing super-power with the threats of nuclear-armed state actors and terrorist organizations around the world. In many ways, it is a more dangerous world than we had previously faced 20 years ago. These rogue states and terrorists answer to no one but themselves and their dangerous ideology.

While Israel may have been a good friend to the United States in the fight against the Soviets, it is no longer needed in that position since the collapse of the USSR. In fact, Israel may be seen by some as a detriment to the US.

The United States is at war with Islamic terrorists. As such, the US has to be able to negotiate with the Arab/Muslim countries in order to try to stop these terrorists. There is also the US dependency on Arab oil.

Americans have a strong tendency to think that everyone else believes in the same truths as we believe. We have codified these beliefs in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. We believe that "all men are created equal" and that our government cannot establish an official religion for the country - that all are allowed to worship freely. The beauty of the United States is E Pluribus Unum - 'out of many, one', we all believe in these codified beliefs.

We take these truths for granted - and are blinded by them at the same time. We assume that these truths are universal, that others believe in them as well. It's not true - especially in the Muslim world. As a wise man once said - this is the Middle East, not the middle west.

Some Americans believe that we can negotiate our differences away - in other words "why can't we all just get along."

In order to fully understand the differences between American ideals and the Muslim world we need to look at the ideology of the Islamic terrorists since they are on the forefront of the conflict.

Islamic terrorists are religious Muslims. They believe in certain basic beliefs.

The Revelation from G-d.
They believe that the Jews received a Revelation from G-d, the Torah, but then corrupted that Revelation. Christians received a Revelation, the New Testament, but corrupted their book too. According to them, the Koran is the final, uncorrupted word of G-d.

World View.
To these Muslims, the world is divided into two parts. The first part is the Dar al-Islam, the House of Islam. This is the area that, according to the Koran, is under Muslim rule. The second part is called Dar al-Harb, the House of War. This refers to the area of the world that is under non-Muslim control. Between these two parts there will always be perpetual state of war. They believe that this will continue until the non-Muslims either accept Islam, or submit to being second class citizens to Muslim rulers.

Some Muslims argue that they only fight defensively - not offensively. This is true, depending on your definition of "defensive". Muslims believe that any land that had come under Muslim rule at any point in time in history - belongs to the Muslims, and if it is currently under non-Muslim rule it must be defended against those non-Muslims. That is the definition of "fighting defensively." A bit problematic to say the least.

The Muslim world view is diametrically opposed to the American world view.
We seek to instigate the Muslim community to get up and liberate its land, to fight for the sake of Allah, and to make the Shari'a the highest law, and the word of Allah the highest word of all. - Osama bin Laden, June 10, 1999


Democracy is based on the principle that the people are the source of all authority...In other words, the legislator who must be obeyed in a democracy is man, and not Allah. That means that the one who is worshipped and obeyed and deified, from the point of view of legislating and prohibiting, is man, the created, and not Allah. That is the very essence of heresy and polytheism and error...

Under democracy, a man can believe anything he wants, choose any religion he wants, and convert to any religion whenever he wants, even if this apostasy means abandoning the religion of Allah... This is a matter which is patently perverse and false...

Democracy is based on the principal [sic] of 'freedom of expression', no matter what the expression might be, even if it means hurting and reviling the Divine Being [Allah] and the laws of Islam, because in democracy nothing is so sacred that one cannot be insolent or use vile language about it.

Democracy is based on the principle of freedom of association and of forming political parties and the like, no matter what the creed, ideas, and ethics of these parties may be... voluntary recognition of the legality of heretical parties implies acquiescence in heresy... Acquiescence in heresy is heresy... - Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi, January 23, 2005


Democracy and parliaments, my brothers, are from the religion and desires of infidels... Democracy means the rule of the people... which means that who is to be obeyed and worshipped is not Allah. - Abu Maysara, March 2, 2005 (The World According to Al Qaeda by Brad K. Berner)

With this understanding behind us we can better understand the current situation as a Clash of Cultures. Democracy versus Muslim theocracy - Sha'ria Law.

Rather than attempt to appease those who violently disagree with the freedoms we take for granted, the United States must stand firm against them. These are the terrorists and rogue states that support them. They cannot and must not be negotiated with. The United States must support those countries that believe in individual freedoms and democracy. This includes the State of Israel.

While Israel is considered a "Jewish" state, it is also clearly a democracy - representing both Jews and Arabs in its parliament. Freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion are guaranteed to all.

The United States must stand strong with all democracies in this Clash of Cultures, and not sell our allies short in order to placate Muslim sensibilities. Israel is at the forefront of this Clash; a country attempting to create a balance of security needs and individual freedoms. There is much the US could learn from Israel as we have begun to realize in our post-9/11 world.

It's time for the United States to treat Israel as an equal - rather than as footnote in the anti-Communist strategies of the 1980s. Those days are over. Welcome to the War for Democracy.

13 April 2010

Does the Jewish Vote Matter?

Chart: Jewish Vote 1972 -2008 | NJDC

If you are a Jewish liberal/Democrat -- you don't count. That is, if you think that Israel is important.

Jews range between 1.7% and 2.2% of the United States' population, with the largest number focused in New York and California. Jews on a whole are liberal and vote Democratic. This tendency has been going on for a long time. The problem with this is that the Democratic Party has no reason to "prove" themselves to their Jewish constituents. Familiarity breeds contempt. We see this clearly with our current President and his administration.

We've seen how Vice-President Joe Biden had an issue with 1600 Jewish homes being built in Jerusalem - the 3000 year old capital of Israel.

We've seen how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton escalated tension between allies by having a 45 minute hissy fit on the phone with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

We then saw President Barack Obama insult Prime Minister Netanyahu to his face by refusing a photo-op for the media and leaving Netanyahu to stew for an hour as Obama went to eat dinner with his family.

Is this how we treat an ally? Is this how we treat the constituents that believe in the special relationship between our two countries?

Even Abe Foxman, left-leaning head of the ADL was disturbed by this treatment.
"We are shocked and stunned at the Administration's tone and public dressing down of Israel," Anti-Defamation League director Abraham Foxman said in a statement. "We cannot remember an instance when such harsh language was directed at a friend and ally of the United States."

In fact we know that Obama does not concern himself with the Jewish voter. Obama spokesman, Robert Gibbs, related an instance where he was sitting in on a meeting related to the crisis with Israel.
He [Gibbs] did chime in during last month's escalating tensions with Israel, if only to make sure the president understood the "conventional wisdom" promoted in the media, that Obama's toughness with Likud hard-liners would potentially erode his domestic Jewish support. "For a lot of reasons, he would discount that," Gibbs said, referring to the president.

In other words, Obama is going to do whatever he wants without consideration for the voting block that placed 80% of it's support behind him. Amazing.

The bizarre concept of Obama attempting to force a "regime change" has been noted, evidenced by the attitude toward Netanyahu - publicly shaming him in front of the world.
There's a widespread view -- almost a conviction in Washington these days -- that Netanyahu just isn't capable of reaching a deal, and that the Palestinians and Arabs will never trust him. So why expend months of effort starting a process with Netanyahu that you can't possibly conclude with him?

The remedy, if regime change is the goal, is to hang tough on settlements, create conditions for starting negotiations that are reasonable but that Netanyahu's coalition can't accept, and not-so-subtly suggest that Netanyahu can't be a real partner in a peace process. The administration's recent leak that it's considering putting out its own peace plan will only further undermine any chance of partnership.

Sooner or later, the thinking goes, it would become clear in Israel that the prime minister can't manage the nation's most important relationship, and that he is putting settlements above Israeli security at a time when the Iranian threat looms large and close ties with the U.S. are more important than ever. The American hope would be that public and political pressure would mount, forcing Netanyahu to broaden his government or even impelling a change at the top.

Reported in today's New York Times is a focus on Obama's shift of focus in the Middle East, even declaring that solving the Israeli-Arab conflict was a
“vital national security interest of the United States,” he was highlighting a change that has resulted from a lengthy debate among his top officials over how best to balance support for Israel against other American interests.

This shift, described by administration officials who did not want to be quoted by name when discussing internal discussions, is driving the White House’s urgency to help broker a Middle East peace deal. It increases the likelihood that Mr. Obama, frustrated by the inability of the Israelis and the Palestinians to come to terms, will propose his own parameters for an eventual Palestinian state.

Mr. Obama said conflicts like the one in the Middle East ended up “costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure” — drawing an explicit link between the Israeli-Palestinian strife and the safety of American soldiers as they battle Islamic extremism and terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

This is a most disturbing statement. Not only is the President considering the United States/Israel relationship as irrelevant as seen by having to "balance support with other American interests"... he is directly linking the safety of American troops to the lack of a peace agreement between the Jews and the Arabs in the Middle East. Is this going to bring American Jews the charge of "dual-loyalty"? This is a scary thought and anti-semitism at it's best.

This statement is also buying the Arab narrative of an "occupying Zionist" presence in the Middle East as the basis for all Muslim conflicts hook-line-and sinker. This is a dramatic departure from past American policy.

Of course we know that if Israel were no longer in existence there would be no conflict in the Middle East or around the world because the Arabs are a peace-loving group of people.

Let us not fool ourselves. The Obama administration has dramatically weakened and has undermined Israel's position on the world stage. The results should not surprise us. The UK has recently banned the Western Wall from Israeli tourism advertisements.
... a ruling by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority has taken things to new heights of absurdity. The ASA dealt with a complaint concerning an Israel Government Tourist Office advert that "the photograph featured for Jerusalem was of East Jerusalem" and therefore "the ad misleadingly implied that East Jerusalem was part of the state of Israel."

In other words, the Western Wall is no longer an accepted part of the Jewish state after 3000 years.

Israel has gone over and above to prove themselves as peace-makers in the face of terrorism. All the actions - withdrawing from Gaza, dislocating citizens to create a Jew-free zone... are considered null and void as far as Obama is concerned.

Obama will be proposing his own solution to the Jewish-Arab conflict. Don't forget that Samantha Powers is a foreign policy advisor to the president. Powers who has compared Israel's treatment of Arabs to the the massacre in Rwanda - even suggesting that Israel be left out of any decision making process.
Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It's a terrible thing to do, it's fundamentally undemocratic …. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention, which, very much like the Rwanda scenario, that thought experiment, if we had intervened early.... Any intervention is going to come under fierce criticism. But we have to think about lesser evils, especially when the human stakes are becoming ever more pronounced.

Is this where we are headed? Unilateral intervention by the United States in the Israel-Arab conflict?

Watching as this administration singlehandedly undermines Israel in the world's eyes, weakening it's support of a democracy that has wholeheartedly stood behind the United States over the last 62 years, an administration that is actively questioning Jewish loyalty during a time of war -- I must ask Jews who vote for the Democratic Party... why? Your support of the Democratic Party has not brought security to Israel or to Jews around the world, rather just the opposite (anti-semitism has doubled everywhere since Israel is seen as weak).

Please reconsider your support. The Jewish vote should not be taken for granted.

Other worthwhile reading/watching:
Never Again Should We Be Silent - by Ed Koch, former Democratic mayor of NYC

“I believe the Obama administration is willing to throw Israel under the bus in order to please the Muslim nations.” - Ed Koch television interview

Israel or Terrorists - Investor's Business Daily editorial

The Solace of Poor U.S.-Israel Relations - by Daniel Pipes

Letter to President Obama - by Ronald S. Lauder, President of the World Jewish Congress

Bipartisan House Letter - to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with 327 signatures

02 April 2010

A Voice from the Past

... the principles on which the constitutions of the American states rest, the principles of order, balance of powers, true liberty, and sincere and deep respect for law, are indispensable for all republics; they should be common to them all; and it is safe to forecast that where they are not found the republic will soon have ceased to exist.

- Alexis de Tocqueville (1848) preface to 12th ed. of Democracy in America

24 March 2010

Does Israel have a Plan B?

I believe that all countries should do what is in the best interest of their respective countries.

I expect that the United States should do what is best for the United States and her citizens. (I don't see this happening at the moment, but that's an article for the future).

I also expect that Israel should do what is best for Israel and her citizens.

Israel and the United States have been allies since Israel's founding in 1948, but there have even been times over the course of time that Israel and the U.S. have not seen eye to eye. These moments have generally occurred when Israel decided to defend herself and those living in the country.

1956 - Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, an important trade waterway in the Middle East. In a joint effort, Israel, Great Britian and France invaded Egypt and took the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza. Israel was condemned by President Eisenhower and had aid threatened to be withheld if Israel didn't withdraw. They did.

1973 - The Yom Kippur War. Israel was attacked by the surrounding Arab countries on one of the holiest days of the Jewish calendar. The battle was not going well when Israel asked the U.S. for help.
Just days after Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack on the holiest day of the Jewish year (Oct. 6, 1973), Israel urgently needed more tanks, planes and ammunition, its leaders argued. But 25 years ago, at the height of the Yom Kippur War, the White House responded that it would study the request.

Secretary of State Kissinger waited six days before granting the request. In his words: "let Israel come out ahead, but let them bleed."

1975 - President Ford threatened to re-evaluate the U.S.- Israel relationship if Israel did not pull out of the Sinai Peninsula.

1981 - U.S. condemned Israel's bombing of Iraq's nuclear factory in Osirak.

1982 - President Reagan forced Israel's Prime Minister Begin into a ceasefire in Lebanon.

We know that President H.W. Bush's administration was not especially friendly to Israel.

President Bill Clinton was known as being "very friendly" toward the Jewish state. This friendship lead to many "piece" agreements where Israel gave away much and received little.

President George W. Bush was probably the most open in his support of Israel. Bush went on to speak about the bond between the United States and Israel.
"Some people suggest that if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it," Bush told a special session of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, in Jerusalem.

"Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you," Bush added.

And now we have our current President Obama - who is known to have become "livid" when he heard about the new Jewish homes being built in Jerusalem.

If the basic reasoning for any government's existence is to protect its citizenry - and it is being forced into a situation where they are unable to defend those citizens... that government finds itself in an untenable situation.

Israel and the United States have been allies since 1948 - but not without some friction. Taking a walk through American-Israeli relations - I would suggest that Israel had better have a Plan B. A plan that takes into account the weakening of ties of the two countries.

This is a sad moment for Jews all around the world. A moment where we realize that the bonds that bind these two countries together are not "unbreakable", and that this may be the time for Israel to realize that it's time to stand on her own without the strings attaching her to the United States. There may be presidents that see the importance of that connection... and there may be presidents that do not. Israel cannot afford to be dependent on a country that may or may not see the vital importance of the relationship.

It's time for Israel to go to Plan B.

22 March 2010

I Will Bless Those Who Bless You...

I love when people try to be smarter when they really are.

Two perfect examples come from our esteemed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, an invited guest to the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference. During her remarks to the audience she explained that the reason why she and the Obama administration had come down so harshly on Israel for announcing the construction of 1600 Jewish homes in Jerusalem was "because we are committed to Israel and its security," she said. Yup. That's the equivalent to a domestic violence situation - I hit her because I love her. That does it for me.

The second example of Hillary's attempt to be smarter than she looks is when she spoke about what courage it takes to do hard things (i.e. making peace with terrorists). Of course with the Jews heading into the season of Passover she decided to invoke Biblical references about following Moses into the Promised Land.

This reference to Moses is brilliant and aptly timed for the Jewish People of today - although I don't know that she should have reminded us of the Hagaddah, the Passover narrative read at the seder. (As an aside: Moses himself didn't stand quietly aside as Jews were hurt - he killed an Egyptian when that Egyptian assaulted a Jew.)

The paragraph - V'hee Sheamda speaks about all those who have attempted to destroy us.
This is what has stood by our fathers and us! For not just one alone has risen against us to destroy us, but in every generation they rise against us to destroy us; and the Holy One, blessed be He, saves us from their hand!

In every generation there are those who have attempted to destroy us. The Jewish People are no stranger to such things. But we must remind ourselves who saves us every time. It's not the U.S. State Department, not foreign aid and not even the "savior" Obama. It's G-d, the G-d of the Jewish People.

If Hillary wants to wax Biblical she may want to check out the book of Joshua - as the Jews were conquering the Land. The Jewish People had captured five kings of the area.
It happened when they brought out those kings to Joshua that Joshua summoned all the men of Israel and said to the officers of the men of war to had gone with him, "Approach, place your feet on the necks of these kings." They approached and placed their feet on their necks. Joshua said to them, "Do not fear, do not lose resolve; be strong and courageous, for thus shall G-d do to all your enemies with whom you battle." Joshua struck them after that and killed them... (Joshua 10:24-26)

And if she supposes to talk about "occupied lands" than I may point her in the direction of the Early Prophets. The King of Ammon decided to declare war on the Jewish People because
"Israel took away my land when it ascended from Egypt, from Arnon to the Jabbok to the Jordan! So now return them in peace." (Judges 11:13)

To this statement the leader of Israel, Jephthah, gives a short history how the Jewish People came to claim this land finishing with the important words,
"And now G-d, the G-d of Israel, has driven out the Amorite because of His People Israel - yet you would possess it?..." (Judges 11:23)

Again and again, the G-d of the Jewish People saves us from those who would do us harm - no matter who the culprit may be. Certainly it would behoove our Secretary of State as well as others in the administration to dust off their Bibles and review which side of history they would like to be on.

19 March 2010

Peace, Peace... there is no Peace

Last week when Vice-President Biden was in Israel trying to re-start the "piece" talks, the Israeli government happened to announce the building of 1600 new homes in a religious neighborhood called Ramat Shlomo - established by peace-nik Yitzchak Rabin. Biden took this opportune time to condemn the Jewish state for such actions.

"I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem," Biden said.

The American vice president added that the
"substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel."

"We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them," Biden said...

This is an incredible statement in many ways, but we'll focus on two because I don't have all day.

Number One: Jerusalem has never been on the negotiating table. The only reason there is free access to any of the religious sites in Jerusalem is because Israel has control over them. If they were under the "protection" of the Arabs - there would be no free access, and in a worse case scenario destroyed. (The Tomb of Joseph in Schem/Nablus was destroyed when handed over to the Arabs under a "piece" agreement and replaced with a mosque.)

Number Two: These 1600 homes are the "kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now" and is counter to building "an atmosphere to support negotiations". Blah, blah blah. That's right, Jews building homes in Jerusalem undermines trust. Is that right? You know what undermines "trust" and is counter to building the right "atmosphere"? Rockets.

Rockets have continuously been raining on southern Israel. No one bothers to report a favorite daily activity by Hamas - but shockingly enough - one of the rockets happened to murder a Thai worker the other day. Does Biden care? No.

Let's not only pin the "trust" issue on Hamas - we can look over at the Palestinian Authority (the moderates) and see what they have done to create trust and a good "atmosphere" for peace.

Could it be the dedication of a town square of in El-Bireh (near the friendly city of Ramallah) for Dalal Mughrabi and her attack on a civilian bus - murdering 37 innocents...
including Liat Gal-On, age 6, and Illan Hohman, age 3, Galit Ankwa, age 2, Moti Zit, age 9, and six other children, while wounding 73 other civilians. An attack incidentally that remains the deadliest of all the terror attacks in Israel's history.

A heartwarming interview with Mughrabi's sister - who calls her a "source of pride for Palestinian women", along with Mughrabi's letter explaining her "martyrdom" played on PA television on March 11, 2010 commemorating the massacre. A worthwhile watch. Yes, these are our "peace" partners. I feel better already.

* Never mind the other everyday attacks on the roads in Judea/Samaria (West Bank) that could be thwarted by the "moderate" PA. Just the other day a man and his nine-month old baby had their car firebombed, but never mind.

* Never mind the indoctrination aimed at children to become "martyrs".

* Never mind the riots and mayhem begun by the PA as a way of stopping Israel from declaring the Cave of Machpela/Cave of the Patriarchs (Hebron) and Tomb of Rachel (Bethlehem) as Jewish Heritage sites.

* Never mind the rock throwing off the top of the Western Wall onto worshippers as the result of the rededication of the Hurva Synagogue (destroyed by the Jordanian army in 1948 when the city was split) located in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.

Shut up Biden. Don't speak these words of "peace" and "trust" while allowing murders to get away with the blood on their hands. Peace, peace... there is no peace. This is war.

04 March 2010

Individual vs. Government

Another wonderful example of how the individual's creativity is always better than government trying to create solutions.
Volunteers in Afghanistan -- both locals and foreigners from the MIT Bits and Atoms lab -- have been building out a wireless network made largely from locally scrounged junk. They call it "FabFi" and it's kicking ass, especially when compared with the World Bank-funded alternative, which has spent seven years and hundreds of millions of dollars and only managed its first international link last summer.

Amazing, but not surprising.

03 March 2010

Who Cares about Mahmoud al-Mabhouh?

Imagine a terrorist is living within your country. He is the head of a large terrorist organization. He is known for smuggling weapons from Iran terrorists for the express purpose of murder and mayhem. He himself personally has murdered innocents - then standing on the person murdered and praising Allah. Wouldn't you want your government to get rid of him?

This is the man who was killed January 19th in Dubai. Mahmoud al-Mabhoub, a senior Hamas commander.

A lot of outrage has been directed toward Israel and the Mossad for his murder and Israel has neither claimed or denied responsibility for his death. Dubai's chief of police has recently called for the arrest of Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the head of the Mossad.

Australia and England are also upset over the situation - their passports were forged in order for the assassins to enter Dubai.

What's there to get upset about? The man was a murderer - plain and simple. It's irrelevant who knocked him off... we should give them all medals. The world is a safer place than it was before January 19th.

This situation reminds me of another assassination back in March 2004. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder of Hamas. At the time Israel removed him from the land of the living, the World decried their actions never minding the purpose of the Hamas terrorist organization. By 2004, Hamas had
...orchestrated 425 terrorist attacks, murdered 377 Israelis and wounded 2,076 more since September 2000. They have been responsible for the deaths of Americans as well. These deaths include the attack in the Hebrew University cafeteria in Jerusalem, killing 5 American students of July 2002.(Jerusalem Post "Israel uses Yassin’s words against him" 3/22/04 )

Jihad is a way of life. Quoting the Oral Tradition of Islam, the Hadith, the Hamas website quotes clearly, "I swear by the holder of Mohammed’s soul that I would like to invade and be killed for the sake of Allah, then invade and be killed, and then invade again and be killed."

Hamas is not above using children in their actions. Even Amnesty International has called on Arab terrorists organizations to stop using children in their attacks....

Rather than praise Israel for doing what was necessary the World condemned their actions. Once again today, we see the stupidity of the West. Instead of condemning Dubai for allowing safe passage to a known Hamas murderer - they would rather condemn the Jewish State for defending their citizens. An easy way out rather than deal with the real problem - Islamic terrorism.

12 February 2010

Breasts of Death

Nobody can say that Muslim terrorists aren't creative. They certainly are. Whether they are busy strapping bombs to children, to animals, hiding them in ambulances or in their underwear -- we must at least acknowledge a high level of creativity.

It is truly amazing. These people are so dedicated to murder, they will find many different paths to their objective.

While our airport screeners are busy pulling old women and those with young children out of line - there are those finding ways to hide their dangerous packages -- in places where screeners are unlikely to look. Example: The Briefs Bomber.

Now we are facing a new type of bomber, the Breast Bomber. Yes, it's true.
Agents for Britain's MI5 intelligence service have discovered that Muslim doctors trained at some of Britain's leading teaching hospitals have returned to their own countries to fit surgical implants filled with explosives...

Women suicide bombers recruited by al-Qaida are known to have had the explosives inserted in their breasts under techniques similar to breast enhancing surgery. The lethal explosives – usually PETN (pentaerythritol Tetrabitrate) – are inserted during the operation inside the plastic shapes. The breast is then sewn up.

Give the terrorists extra credit for their efforts.

Thankfully we have a new screening machine and it seems to be able to detect this type of situation. A woman writing about her experience explained that she was pulled over because of reconstructive breast surgery due to a mastectomy - which included a sac of silicone. It's a good thing she has a good sense of humor -- but at the same time hits the nail on the head.
Frankly, I think it's a good thing that they're being careful about my left breast. It's probably only a matter of time until someone tries to be the first "boobie bomber." Because, really, shoes and underpants are so passe in the terror world these days.

Shockingly enough Muslims are not okay with this new type of screening.
The Fiqh Council of North America – a body of Islamic scholars that includes some from Michigan – issued a fatwa this week that says going through the airport scanners would violate Islamic rules on modesty.

This ruling against the scanners is being supported by CAIR and the Islamic Society of North America.
According to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, ISNA "is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation"; "convenes annual conferences where Islamist militants have been given a platform to incite violence and promote hatred" (for instance, al Qaeda supporter and PLO official Yusuf Al-Qaradhawi was invited to speak at an ISNA conference); has held fundraisers for terrorists (after Hamas leader Mousa Marzook was arrested and eventually deported in 1997, ISNA raised money for his defense); has condemned the U.S. government's post-9/11 seizure of Hamas' and Palestinian Islamic Jihad's financial assets; and publishes a bi-monthly magazine, Islamic Horizons, that "often champions militant Islamist doctrine."

Adds Emerson: "I think ISNA has been an umbrella, also a promoter of groups that have been involved in terrorism. I am not going to accuse the ISNA of being directly involved in terrorism. I will say ISNA has sponsored extremists, racists, people who call for Jihad against the United States."

If we know that terrorists are exploring breast implant bombs...
And we know that most (if not all) terrorists today are Muslim...
And we also know that Muslims are not okay with profiling or with enhanced screening...
What does this leave us thinking about Muslims and our security?