Ft Lauderdale, Florida- "Go Nazi Germany!"

The above rally was filmed January 13, 2009 at Ft Lauderdale, Florida. The video is almost 10 minutes long but bears watching. You will see and hear:

Nazi salutes
"Jesus killers"
"Hitler should have finished the job"
"Go Hitler"
"Go Nazi Germany"
"Go back to your ovens"
"Hezbollah-Hezbollah"

(Keep in mind that Hezbollah has always been suspected of involvement in the bombing of the Marine Corp barracks in Lebanon killing over 200 Marines although it was before they actually declared their existence.)

And you wonder which side is right in this conflict?

This is what is taking place right on the streets of US cities. It is beyond disgusting. And this is being directed to our own American Jewish citizens-on our soil.

and in Toronto..........."Hitler Didn't Do a Good Job"

Pro-Hamas Rally at UC Irvine

Amir Abdel Malik Ali at a previous appearance at UCI.





Today, I was caught quite by surprise to learn at the last minute that the Muslim Student Union was having another anti-Israel rally at UC-Irvine. In fact, I just happened to read an e-mail that Imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali was speaking at the flag poles at 12 noon. I was already 10 minutes late! By the time I arrived, Ali was already 20 minutes into a one hour talk. After the speech, I spoke with him for about 20 minutes. (Note) Ted Bleiweis of the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism heard the entire speech and will be reporting on it as well.

Ali's speech was the standard, fiery anti-Israel rant that he always gives, spiced with anti-American rhetoric, calling George Bush an idiot, and referring to certain blacks-and Mahmoud Abbas as "poop-butt Uncle Toms" (I think I have that right.) He even praised Hugo Chavez. Near the end, he called upon the Muslim students in the audience from other countries to spread the word back home to boycott all American products. How patriotic!

When his talk concluded at 1pm, I approached and asked if Ali was taking questions. I was told no, but that I could speak with him directly. So I walked over and introduced myself. We then proceeded to have a civil but spirited debate on various points for about 15 minutes as some 30 or so students gathered around to listen in. My question was this; in recent anti-Israel demonstrations in Ft Lauderdale, Los Angeles and other places, some demonstrators had made comments such as,"Go back to the ovens", "you need a bigger oven", "long live Hitler", "Hitler rest in peace". Further that some posters had contained swastikas over the Star of David. I asked him if he would condemn those expressions. He replied in the affirmative except for the swastikas over the Star of David, which he considered a means of equating what the Israels are doing to the Palestinians to what the Nazis did to the Jews. (Later in the discussion, I suggested that he let his audiences know in his speeches that references to Hitler and ovens were wrong.)

I also called his attention to the mock wall that was back at the scene and that last year, it had contained a caricature of Ariel Sharon in the old Nazi style of depicting Jews (Der Stuermer). He said he was not aware of it. (Apparently, it had been on the wall earlier that morning, but had been taken off according to a statement made by a Muslim student to a Jewish professor-who relayed it to me.) I also reminded him of his last appearnce at UCI when he had referred to Obama's Jewish advisors, "Rahm Israel Emanuel, Madelyn Albright and David Axelrod-a Zionist". He stated that they were indeed "Zionists". My point was that he himself had made remarks that could be interpreted as anti-Semitic (which brought up an exchange over who is "Semitic"). He pointed out that he had never made negative remarks about Jews-only "Zionist" Jews, at which point, I noted sarcastically that putting the word "Zionists" in front of it made it all right.

The debate went back and forth about Israel, the US, Middle Eastern Jews who were driven out of Arab countries after 1948, etc. He asked if I supported Israel, I stated that I did and supported Israel's right to exist and defend itself. I pointed out to him that at no time, does he ever talk about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians or a negotiated settlement with two states, which is actually the policy of the US Government. As I asked that question, he nodded in silent acknowledgement.

I also expressed to Ali that, in my opinion, he was poisoning the minds of his young audience, leading them to believe that America was an evil country. When I expressed my love for America, he told me America was an empire, and asked me if I believed that (I said no). There was also an exchange over the meaning of Zionist, which I still consider an imprecise term. When he mentioned that there was a "witch hunt" on-going in the country against people who believed like he did, I reminded him that no one was dragging him off to jail for his statements. He replied that people in America were being arrested and held without charges in some cases for saying something in mosques. He brought up the name of Sami al Arian, and I responded that al-Arian belonged in jail, and if released, should be deported.

One thing I have learned about Ali is that he believes in conspiracies. He believes that the FBI was involved in the murder of Martin Luther King and "influenced" the Nation of Islam to murder Malcolm X (previous talks). When I raised the question of the almost one million Jews driven from Arab lands after 1948, he passed it off as happening because some unspecified people had arranged to move them to someplace which I believe he was referring to Israel.

As I said, the conversation was civil and the students listened silently. As I left, a young man said to me that if I favored peace why did I support the IDF's actions in Gaza. My reply to him was to imagine if the Cuban Government were lobbing rockets into Miami-what would the US do? His answer?

"We would deserve it."

My response to that was simply if that is what he believed, there was no point for further discussion.

So that was pretty much it as I recall the conversation. Depending on your point of view and bias, you might have different opinions on who carried the day and made the best points. Ali, though he believes in some far-out conspiracies, is a formidable adversary. In our final exchange, he told me that the government was destroying America, at which time I stated that I agreed with him on that point, but for entirely different reasons. With that, I told him I had to teach a class and I looked forward to our next encounter. Whether anyone else stepped in to challenge him, I don't know.

What Hamas Teaches the Children of Gaza

This film is from Palestinian Media Watch. It shows what Hamas is teaching the children of Gaza. I suggest that those of you who feel the need to protest Israel in the streets of America for fighting Hamas (and Hizbollah) take a few minutes to watch this video. Hopefully, it will give you pause.

Let's Play, "Name That Martyr"

Which is the below persons does not belong on the list?

a Martin Luther King
b Mahatmas Gandhi
c Nelson Mandela
d Rod Blagoyevich

Here's a clue.

Disturbing News From Algeria

Algiers, Algeria


There are disturbing reports being released to the news media regarding a CIA station chief in Algiers, Algeria, who has been accused by two women in that country of having raped them after lacing their drinks with knockout drugs at parties during the past year.

According to an affidavit in support of a search warrant filed in Alexandria, Virginia by a State Department investigative agent, Andrew Warren, ex-CIA station chief in Algiers, is being investigated for at least two sexual assaults. Warren has been reassigned back to the US pending the results of the investigation.

At this point, it has been alleged that while stationed at the American Embassy in Algiers, Warren drugged at least two Algerian women at parties, had sex with them while they were in an unconscious state and video-taped the incidents. It is suspected that there may be more than the two who have come forward. At this stage the case is still in the investigative stage with grand jury testimony expected to follow.

Obviously, this bodes ill for any efforts to improve relations with the Muslim world-one of President Obama's stated goals. Both the women in question are Muslim in a country faced with a serious problem of Islamic extremism. The idea of at least two Muslim women being raped by an American in Algeria is cause for tremendous concern. That the suspect was the CIA station chief multiplies the problem. The one thing that may alleviate the problem is that Warren himself is a Muslim convert.

Geo-political considerations aside, rape is a heinous crime. Without prejudging Warren's guilt or innocence, it can only be hoped that this case will be fully investigated by the appropriate authorities and justice done. This case will be attracting more attention in the days, weeks and months ahead. It goes without saying that the American Government is once again going to be under the magnifying glass in the Muslim world.

It could not have come at a worse time.

The "Stimulous Package"- Oinkers Aweigh!

"Now that's what I call stimulation."


The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. That's what this obscene boondoggle of a spending bill that is winding its way through Congress has been named. For one thing, any time you see the government using the term "investment"-or in this case-"reinvestment", it's time to hold on to your wallet. Translation= tax and spend.

Of course, President Obama and the Democrats are telling us that the purpose of this bill is "to stimulate the economy". They tell us that the situation is so urgent that the bill must be passed immediately. Translation= We want it passed before it is held to public scrutiny because it is so flawed that if the people could really understand what the bill is about, they would never accept it. This is the same reasoning that we heard about the urgency to confirm Tim "Turbo-Tax" Geithner as Treasury Secretary and get him working to save the American economy-this the man who used Turbo-Tax do do his taxes and wound up owing the Government over $34,000.

Today, the bill, now totaling some $825 billion, passed the House with all Republicans voting against it along with a dozen Democrats.

As I write this piece, I am gazing down the list of proposed expenditures. What this is is simply a massive spending/welfare bonanza-and for what?

* Note that there may have already been changes in the below expenditures as the bill goes through Congress.

The first thing I see is some 140 billion going to Infrastructure; roads, school construction and repair, upgrade parks. That doesn't sound too bad, but then I think about how the folks in Congress are going to be fighting to get bridges and federal buildings built in their districts so they can get their names on them. Robert Byrd (D-WV) of course, is the master of this. There must be a few hundred bridges, schools, roads, highways, and public restrooms named after him in West Virginia. John Murtha (D-PA) isn't far behind.




The Infrastructure heading also lists 2.25 billion dollars for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program Block grant "to enable state and local governments, in partnership with community-based organizations, to acquire, construct, and rehabilitate affordable housing and provide rental assistance to poor families."

Then there is 5 billion dollars to the public housing capital fund "to enable local public housing agencies to address a 32 billion backlog in capital needs-especially those improving energy efficiency in aging developments."

2.1 billion for full-year payments to owners receiving Section 8 project-based rental assistance.

Neighborhood Stabilization Fund- 2.25 billion for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes.

How about the Homeless Prevention Fund 1.5 billion for homeless prevention "activities"?

How about 1.4 billion to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for scientific research, infrastructure and competitive grants?

So much for the "Infrastructure". Now we move to Education and Training.

There is 13.9 billion to increase the Pell Grant maximum award and pay for increased program costs..........

There is 13 billion to "help close the achievement gap and enable disadvantaged students to reach their potential."

Under Training, we see the following:

A total of $3.4 billion for "job training including formula grants for adult, dislocated worker and youth programs".

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants- $500 million for state formula grants "to help individuals with disabilities prepare for and sustain gainful employment.

Employment Services Grants-$400 million to "match unemployed individuals to job openings through state employment service agencies and allow states to provide customized reemployment services."

Under Energy, we see a total estimated expenditure of 51 billion "to provide INVESTMENTS in the development of "clean, efficient, American energy......."

More specifically, $40 billion to the Department of Energy to do whatever they do to develop "clean, efficient, American energy."

2.6 billion to "replace older motor fleet vehicles owned by the Federal Government, with alternative fuel automobiles that will save on fuel costs and reduce carbon emissions." (New G-cars for federal employees).

$6 billion for "Green Buildings" to repair federal buildings using green technology...."

$1.3 billion for grants or loans to "owners" for energy and green retrofit investments. (What owners?)

$613 million to DOD for energy efficiency upgrades and construction of "alternative energy projects" including wind and solar power..."

400 million for rural businesses initiatives including development of renewable energy.


* At this point, the reader might want to take a breath and ask, "What is being stimulated here?".


But there is more.

Under the Heading, Protecting the Vulnerable, we have;

$16.5 billion for additional Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits (formerly the Food Stamp program).

500 million for Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). 150 million for food banks.

Helping Children-
$4.6 billion to increase investments in early childhood programs.

Other

Community Development Financial Institutions- 250 million "to immediately provide capital to qualified community development financial insttuions (CDFIs) to invest in the development of under served communities."

Social Services Block Grant- 400 million for "states and local non-profits to deliver critical services to unemployed and low-income individuals struggling with the effects of the recession."

Under Health (total expenditure-16 billion dollars)

- $5 billion to "jump start efforts to computerize health records..."

This is not a complete list of the expenditures, and the final bill will probably look different in some ways. I think you get the idea however that this is not only a gigantic pork barrel scam, but it also reflects more government involvement in our lives, a return to government welfare-and has little to do with stimulating the economy. It is nothing more than a huge government spending program that would make Lyndon B Johnson blush.


"I heard that Fousesquawk!!"

And who is going to pay for this 800 plus billion dollar program? We are, that's who. There is only one way to pay for all this irresponsible government spending, and that is by raising taxes.

I would urge you to follow this bill and pull up the latest version on-line as it proceeds to final passage. It's our money, folks.

Still "Bushed"

It is the year 2050. Keith Olbermann, now retired and residing at the Happy Valley "Retirement Home" sits and waits......and waits.....

"I won't be here long. George Bush is coming to take me home. Is he here yet?"

"He's coming, Mr Olbermann. He's coming".

Barney Frank and OneUnited Bank

Barney Frank


Not surprisingly, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) is back in the spotlight. This time, the chair of the Financial Services Committee is attracting attention for interceding with the Treasury Department and arranging 12 million dollars in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds to be directed to OneUnited Bank of Massachusetts-even though the bank doesn't seem to meet the guidelines for bailing out banks.

This tiny bank in Massachusetts is the only minority-owned bank in the state. The bank's capital has been depleted, and it suffered a loss of $54.3 million from its holding of preferred stock in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is currently under a cease and desist order from the FDIC for its unsound practices in lending and executive compensation. The bank has been ordered to cut financial ties to a California-based liability company that possesses a beachfront home in Santa Monica worth 6.4 million. The bank also pays for Porsche for the personal use of its president Kevin Gohee.

So why did Frank personally intercede on OneUnited's behalf and steer 12 million to the bank? According to Frank, it would have been tragic if the only black-owned bank in Massachusetts were allowed to fail. He also stated that it was not OneUnited's fault that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ran into problems.

It has been reported by the Wall Street Journal (1-27-09) that in addition to Frank, one other member of Congress was contacted by the bank for assistance. That would be Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). Just coincidentally, Waters' husband, Sidney Williams, was a director of the bank until this past spring. Just a coincidence, mind you.

However, I am confident that President Barack Obama, in his promised era of change and transparency, will clean up this behind-the-scenes process that is anything but transparent.

Besides, Barney Frank is on the job.

The Hypocrisy of Maxine Waters

Representative Maxine Waters, (D-CA)


There are few people in Congress more odious than Maxine Waters (D-CA). A member of the Congressional Black Caucus, Waters, who represents a district on the outskirts of LA, specializes in racial politics. One of her favorite issues is racial profiling, yet she also paints herself as a drug warrior trying to protect the inner city from the scourge of drugs. In that vein, in 1996, she launched into an attack on the CIA based on allegations that the agency was facilitating the flow of cocaine into inner city neighborhoods. Yet, her "concern" about the drug problem is contradicted by her intervention in a DEA Houston drug investigation in 1999.

Following a 1996 article in the San Jose Mercury that alleged the complicity of the CIA in the crack epidemic of the 1980s in Los Angeles, Waters called for an investigation. The Justice Department was unable to find any evidence to support the allegations. Not satisfied, Waters dragged CIA Director John Deutch to a "town hall" forum in South Central Los Angeles to answer the charges in a hall full of hostile community members who verbally abused Deutch. (Security for Deutch was extremely heavy due to the volatile nature of the event.) Waters,having already convicted the CIA, stated at the time the following,

"I’m gonna make somebody pay for what they’ve done to my community and to my people."

Of course, the allegations proved groundless.

Waters' outrage about drug trafficking did not extend to DEA's Houston office in 1999when she learned that they were investigating a certain James Prince, the head of Rap-a-Lot Records in Houston's Fifth Ward. The years-long investigation was being conducted by the local task force composed of DEA and Houston PD drug investigators.
Prince contacted Waters in August of 1999 stating that he feared his life was in danger from DEA. He claimed that he and his associates had been followed, stopped and intimidated by DEA agents on numerous occasions. As a result, Waters, on August, 20, wrote a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, a letter that was forwarded to DEA and on to the Houston Field Office. Waters' letter alleged racial profiling, racial slurs and harassment.

At this point it might be fair to ask why Prince chose to contact Waters, who represented a district in California as opposed to his own Texas representative. Answer? Well, it seems that Prince was a childhood friend of Waters' husband (Sidney Williams). That's why.

But I digress. After Houston Special Agent in Charge Ernest Howard received the letter, he informed the task force officers (DEA-Houston PD) that the investigation against Prince and his organization was being shut down. Subsequently, the lead DEA investigator, Jack Schumacher, was transferred to a desk job. An internal DEA (OPR) investigation was started into the agents' behavior which exonerated them. Not surprisingly, the agents and officers reacted with surprise followed by anger.

One of Prince's recording artists, Brad (Scarface) Jordan, subsequently cut a record, "Look me in my eyes", mocking DEA and claiming that they (Rap-a-Lot) had been able to kill the case.

Eventually, as the news became public, Congressional hearings into Waters' conduct ensued. In 2000, all the involved law enforcement personnel including Schumacher, Howard and then-DEA Administrator Donnie Marshall were subpoenaed to the House Committee on Government Reform chaired by Dan Burton (R-IN). Transcripts from the hearings of December 6-7, 2000 can be read at the site below:

http://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/hearings/106h/74430.txt

It is here that accounts differ. The agents testified that Howard had mentioned a letter and politics as being the reason the case was being shut down. Howard (who is also African-American) testified that the reason he intervened in the investigation was because he did not want to subject his agents to false accusations and public/media abuse. He also testified that the case had not actually been closed, but that he had dictated that no further "pro-active" investigation (undercover, surveillance, ect) be conducted without prior authorization. Yet, he later sent an internal agency e-mail to HQs explicitly stating that the case had been closed due to political pressure. In his testimony, Howard stated that he had worded the message in that manner as to cause an immediate response from his counterparts in HQs so that he could "vent his anger". In his testimony, Marshall denied that DEA would close any case due to political pressure.

Much of the questioning in the hearings broke down along partisan lines. While Burton (R) wanted to get to the bottom of the mess, some of the Democrats, like Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Elijah Cummings (D-MD), seemed more interested in defending Waters, who Cummings referred to as the most courageous drug-fighter in Congress-someone who had put her life on the line. Schumacher was questioned about the number of shootings he had been involved in during his law enforcement career and how many people he had killed.

In effect, Marshall, Howard and other DEA managers testified that Waters had not ordered them to terminate the investigation and that the investigation was still on-going. And that was the end of that. As we all know, Maxine Waters is still in Congress today. Not surprisingly, Waters was listed on the 2005 and 2006 lists of the "Most corrupt members of Congress" by the organization, Citizens for Responsibility for Ethics in Washington (CREW) for her "exercise of her power to financially benefit her husband, daughter and son."

The Rebuttal to Fitna

In reference to my posting of Fitna, in the interest of fairness, I am also posting a rebuttal to Geert Wilders' film. You will note that it is labeled part 1 and deals with Qu'ranic verses. I am still trying to locate the other part(s)of this rebuttal. In the meantime, part 1 is below.

Fitna

I wrote recently on the pending prosecution of Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who is accused of making anti-Muslim expressions including the film he produced, Fitna. This movie is about 17 minutes long and focuses mostly on the Muslim immigrant situation in The Netherlands. The movie does, however, contain images from 9-11, the London subway attacks and the Madrid train bombings. It takes violent quotes from the Qu'ran and shows film clips of radical imams preaching death and destruction to Jews and other non-Muslims. It is graphic, disturbing and not for the weak of stomach.

According to Wilders' critics, the film has the effect of inciting anti-Muslim sentiment. It definitely argues that Europe is being overrun by a hostile population that, in the name of militant Islam, would destroy all our freedoms if it takes over, particularly in regards to women.

So is the film racist, Islamophobic, or whatever label you might want to apply? Or is it factual, merely presenting an unpleasant reality that many would rather not face? It should be pointed out that Wilders' film uses the words of radical Islamists themselves.

The question that should be asked is whether Fitna paints all Muslims with the same brush, or is it unfair to the millions of peaceful Muslims all over the world? Perhaps, yet is it wrong to point out the violent and hateful segment of the Muslim world that is out there? Is it unfair to all Muslims worldwide to make a film about the militants who are dedicated to death and destruction? Or more to the point; should the film be censored or banned and Wilders prosecuted?

In the interest of dealing with those questions, I think it is better to let each viewer decide. Condemn the film if you will. Condemn me for showing it. What one cannot escape is the simple fact that this film deals with the signature issue of our time. We have to deal with it. (There is a rebuttal film to Fitna, which I am also posting separately.)

Here is Fitna

Campus Journalism at UC-Irvine

Being a big critic of the media, I try to cut a little slack when it comes to college newspapers. Though they tend to be heavily slanted to the left, I expect that and am generally willing to understand the occasional examples of unprofessionalism. After all, they are still learning their craft. Yet, I don't think their flaws should be completely ignored. After all, they are the future journalists of America, and they are a product of their journalism schools as well. The one campus newspaper I get a chance to read regularly is that of UC-Irvine, where I teach. It is called New University.

In past years, there was more of a balance in their editorial writing, at least in my opinion. Presently, however, it is pretty much left-wing, Democratic dogma-bash Bush and adore Obama. Below are some excerpts from this week's edition.

The front page story is entitled, "A Candle for Gaza" and reported on a candlelight vigil last Wednesday night organized by the Society of Arab Students. The full article can be found at:

http://www.newuniversity.org/main/article?slug=a_candle_for_gaza176

According to the article, "the overall message was of non denominational mourning". The article also stated that the remembrance (for the victims of Gaza)"lacked the noticeable accusatory edge of previous Gaza-themed events on campus."

Or did it?

In addition to the candles, there were speakers. The moderator, SAS president Aayah Fatayerji gave casualty figures.

"As of last night, the death toll has been raised to 1,312 civilians, of which 580 were children" (numbers that have been strongly challenged in recent days).

Taher Herzallah, a student from UC-Riverside who has family in Gaza, asked, "Where is the humanity"? He then went on to describe the "brutal murder" of three members of his family who were killed when the building they were in was hit by an Israeli bomb. "Where is the humanity when human rights and relief organizations are bombed by Israel and the Palestinians are put to blame?"

Apparently, there were no candles lit for the innocent Israelis killed by Hamas rockets launched into southern Israel. In fact, the Jewish group on UCI's campus, "Anteaters for Israel", was not invited to participate in the event (which the article mentioned along with a statement by the AFI president expressing sadness at the loss of life).

Obviously, this was a one-sided event. Yet, the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, Manuel Gomez showed up to say a few words to the audience. I will quote the article below.

"Gomez also cited the tragedy of the Gaza situation, but emphasized the potential for international change with Barack Obama’s inauguration the day before."

'For almost a decade now, Americans have been repeatedly warned that we are … at war. However, yesterday we celebrated a new vision not only for ourselves, but hopefully for the entire world,' Gomez said. 'This is a vision that begins with preparing for peace. I want to believe that this is more than words. I want to believe that we are indeed on the precipice, on an important international paradigm shift away from conflict and war to one of dialogue, diplomacy and peace.'




If that's all he had to say, Gomez must have taken care to walk a middle line here. (Many critics charge that he has been insensitive to Jewish complaints of anti-Semitic hate speech on campus on the part of the Muslim Student Union and their speakers.)


But in other news:

Last Thursday, Lani Guiner spoke at UCI. You remember her, don't you? She was nominated by Bill Clinton to be Deputy Attorney General. Then it came out that her affirmative action agenda and past writings were so far to the left even Clinton threw her overboard, rescinding her nomination. The title of the article was, "A cry for diversity". Again, I wasn't there, but according to the article, Lani is still Lani.

I want to add here that those were news articles. The lead editorial (by the Editorial Board) was devoted to that favorite liberal bogeyman, Fox News. The focus of the article (I think) was how the network would do under Obama as opposed to when Bush was president.

http://www.newuniversity.org/main/article?slug=fox_news_gears_up176


Now I am not going to get exorcised because the campus newspaper wants to blast Fox News (my favorite news channel). But consider this language:

"It seems as if Sept 11 was the push that Fox News needed to get its slimy head completely out of the womb and into the ass of Bush Jr." The "editorial board" then goes on to blast Bill O'Reilly by bringing up his famous on-air meltdown and fully quoted his use of the F-bomb.

Then there is the weekly feature of New University- "Douchebag of the Week", sort of like Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person in the World" routine. This time, it was another shot at Fox News and their coverage of the inauguration.

As I said before, I don't expect to see my point of view featured much in a campus newspaper. Forget the fact that they may be a few conservative students at UCI (and I suspect there are plenty) whose views are mocked by the New University. What I do find ridiculous is the fact that many of the young writers have to resort to bad language in their writing. Is this what they are learning from their journalism teachers? Are there any adults in charge over there?

If you think the New York Times is bad now, wait until these young rascals take over.

Celebrity Endorsements-Rep. Henry Waxman for Turtle Wax

Rep. Henry Waxman says,

"Folks, with summer fast approaching, you want to keep your dome bright and shiny. So do like I do. Keep that dome always looking great with Turtle Wax! It's guaranteed to give your dome a shiny, fresh off the House-floor look. Won't chip or peel. And-it won't run off in the rain."




"Accept no phony imitations. Give your dome the treatment it deserves. Use Turtle Wax!"

Celebrity Endorsements- William "Cold Cash" Jefferson for Frigidaire

William "Cold Cash" Jefferson says,

"Folks, don't let your hard-earned cash go to waste. Do like me. I keep my cash safe and secure with Frigidaire."




"Frigidaire has a freezer compartment with a capacity for up to $90,000. And if those pesky FBI agents come a-calling, it'll just look like ordinary frozen broccoli. So take it from old "Cold Cash" himself. Keep your cash in Frigidaire."

Celebrity Endorsements -Barry Bonds for Wheaties

Hey kids! If you want to hit homers like Barry Bonds, you better start eating your Wheaties!



Barry Bonds before he started eating his Wheaties




Barry Bonds after he started eating his Wheaties


So if you want to be a home run champ like Barry Bonds-you better start eating your Wheaties!

Remembering Enrique "Kiki" Camarena

Enrique "Kiki" Camarena



DEA Administrator John Lawn comforting Mika Camarena, wife of Enrique Camarena


Yesterday, I attended the funeral of a former DEA colleague, Rich Gorman, in El Cajon near San Diego. Rich was a retired DEA agent who had served most of his career in San Diego and had earned a legendary reputation. Rich died of pancreatic cancer, which cut short a productive retirement in which he was continuing to work in drug law enforcement. To pay tribute, St Luke's Church in El Cajon was filled to capacity as old friends and colleagues came from as far away as Texas and Florida to say good-bye. For myself, having retired from DEA in 1995, I don't often see my old colleagues much any more, and now it is usually at events such as these.

On the program I noted a now-familiar statement which read that en lieu of flowers, donations could be made in Rich's name to the Enrique S. Camarena Foundation, Inc. The name of Enrique "Kiki" Camarena is never far below the surface at a DEA funeral. Due to the nature of drug enforcement work, virtually every old DEA agent knows the names of those who were killed in the line of duty- and often knew the lost agent themselves. I myself, personally experienced the death of one of my fellow-agents in Bangkok due to an accidental gunshot wound which occurred in our office (Bob Lightfoot). At Rich's funeral, I had the chance to meet a somewhat younger agent who had been wounded but survived a shooting in Los Angeles in the late 1980s that had claimed the lives of two other agents (Paul Seema and George Montoya), one of whom I had known from Thailand. (I was working in Pittsburgh when this happened.) Shortly before I retired, I was one of the first on the scene of a fatal traffic accident that killed a fellow agent in Quantico (Becky Dwojeski).

As much as those events affected me personally, no agent's loss hit DEA as an entire agency as hard as that of Camarena. I myself, did not know him. Yet, the circumstances of his death left a mark on me as it did every agent.

Enrique "Kiki" Camarena was a native of Calexico, a small town on the border across from Mexicali where he was born. After serving in the US Marines, he returned to Calexico, where he served as a firefighter and policeman prior to joining DEA. He was extremely popular, respected both as a person and as an agent.

In February 1985, Camarena, while stationed with DEA in Guadalajara, Mexico, was abducted off the street near the American Embassy by drug traffickers, aided by Mexican police officers. Taken to a house owned by drug trafficker Rafael Caro Quintero, he and a Mexican pilot who worked with him were kept for days and systematically tortured before being murdered. At times, a local doctor even brought them back to consciousness so that the torture could resume. Their bodies were later dumped in a field outside the state of Jalisco where they were eventually discovered.

The role in the actual murder and subsequent cover-up by Mexican police was a national scandal and reached right into the Mexican Attorney General's Office. Mexican police even facilitated the escape of Caro Quintero out of Mexico in spite of DEA protests. During the search for Camarena, US Customs Commissioner William von Raab took the extraordinary step of closing the border. Under President Reagan, tremendous diplomatic pressure was put on Mexico to find our agent and achieve justice. The case gained widespread publicity across both nations. Unfortunately, Caro-Quintero became something of a folk hero in Mexico, while Camarena was denigrated. Altogether, it was a disgraceful chapter in Mexico's history.

Eventually, Caro-Quintero was apprehended in Costa Rica and extradited back to an embarrassed Mexico, which tried him and sentenced him to a long term in prison. Other participants were identified and tracked down in both the US and Mexico for prosecution.

While I did not personally know Camarena, I, like all other DEA agents, followed the case closely. I was in Milan, Italy at the time. A couple in the State Department who had worked with Kiki in Guadalajara were then working in the Consulate in Milan, and I had the sad task of letting them know that Kiki's body had been found. Another colleague and friend of mine from our posting in Thailand, was then working in Istanbul, and Kiki's sister was his secretary. It was his duty to make the notification in the wee hours of the morning.

While the news of every agent's death impacted the entire agency, in the case of Camarena, it was the horrific circumstances of his death that left us all shaken and outraged. In response, Kiki's colleagues, many now retired, have worked to keep his memory and legacy alive in the American consciousness. As part of that, the Enrique S. Camarena Educational Foundation has been established to promote anti-drug education among young people, provide scholarships and honor the memory of fallen drug officers.

To learn more about the Enrique S Camarena Educational Foundation, Inc, go to their website at:

http://www.camarenafoundation.org/

Kiki's son, Enrique Camarena Jr, has followed in his father's footsteps, having become a deputy district attorney for San Diego County.

Our News Media in Action

Tip of the hat to the great Don Martin

The Hijab- What is its Significance?

On a recent posting, I described an event at UC-Irvine hosted by the Muslim Student Union and made the observation that the overwhelming majority of the females in the audience were wearing hijabs-the headscarf that many Muslim women choose to wear. For this, I was taken to task by one of my readers as to why I even mentioned it. I answered the question, but I think the whole issue of the hijab merits a posting in itself because I have a lot of questions about it myself.

In light of world events involving Islam-or perhaps, I should say militant Islam, it seems to me that more and more Muslim women are choosing to don the hijab. Of course, in some parts of the Muslim world, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and up until the removal of the Taliban, Afghanistan, the hijab has been mandatory, indeed Afghanistan mandated burkas and Saudi Arabia requires full-facial covering out of doors. On the other hand, in France, for example, the hijab has become so controversial, that the country has tried to ban it in certain public venues like school as an affront to the idea of assimilation.

To be specific, my question is why women wear the hijab. I invite any Muslim readers of this blog (and I know you are out there) to share their insight.

On the one hand, I have an admiration for female modesty-especially given some of the outrageous ways some Western women choose to dress-not that I am a prude by any means. I also think that the headscarf appears quite feminine and attractive in its own right-though I also think that long, black hair is downright beautiful to look at.

The choice of whether to wear the hijab or not I believe should be left to the woman herself and not dictated by other Muslim men who may or may not even be related to her. If the woman is forced to wear it, I think that is unfortunate.

But assuming the individual woman chooses to wear the head-covering, the question remains why? Is it truly because of religious piety? It is my understanding that the Qu'ran does not dictate it. Is there some other statement that the woman is making-especially in Western society? Is it a statement of militancy? Is it a statement that "I am different from you, and I reject Western society"? Is it a warning to non-Muslim men to stay away and not even think about making an advance? Or is it just because my family or peers insist on it?

I think the answer depends on the individual. My perception tells me (perhaps, erroneously) that more hijabs are being seen in the US in light of recent events, and that this could be an ominous sign. There again, I could be completely off-base, and I welcome any enlightenment from Muslim readers, male or female.

Rod Blagoyevich and Pearl Harbor

The USS Blagoyevich as seen from the air


Give credit where credit is due. Soon to be ex-Illinois Governor Rod Blagoyevich has the testicles of an elephant. This man has now set a new record for chutzpah. The impeached governor has now told The Associated Press that Dec. 9, the day he got arrested, is to his family, "what Pearl Harbor Day was to the United States."

And it gets better. Blago added that it was "a complete surprise." then said just as the U.S. prevailed in World War II, he will prevail in fighting the charges.

Well, it may have been a complete surprise to him, but it sure wasn't to millions of other people in Illinois who knew this thing was coming down for the last 2 or 3 years. Heck, it wasn't even a surprise to me.

Of course, if Blago cuts a deal with prosecutors, this whole sordid affair may yet turn out to be a Pearl Harbor for others.

London, January 3, 2009-Protest at Israeli Embassy

Planning a trip to "Merry Olde England" this summer? Big Ben, the Tower of London, Westminster Abbey? No thanks.

Where are those British soccer hooligans when you need them?

Abortion Funding Overseas

Hey, it's only money


President Obama has now changed the Bush policy of denying public funds to groups working overseas that in any way promote, give information about, or encourage abortion. Do I have that correct? This is not an issue I have followed much, but it apparently has gone back and forth like a ping-pong ball as we changed presidents. Very briefly, and without getting into details, I have a basic concern as an American tax-payer.

First of all, on the question of abortion, I am opposed to it. However, reality tells me that this is an issue that is settled country to country. I am guessing that most countries have laws against it though I hardly know the breakdown. My point is this; why are we getting so exorcised about helping women get abortions in other countries? What I mean is, let the laws of the country dictate what can or can't be done. Is it really the mission of the American government-funded by the US taxpayer- to get involved in family-planning in other countries-or our own country for that matter? I am not against charity for people in poor countries, but I say let the private charities handle it. Whether a woman in Ethiopia has or doesn't have an abortion is of no concern to me, and I sure don't want to have to pay more in taxes so America can get involved in it.

Of course, this will probably be hidden somewhere in that one trillion dollar "stimulus package" we are about to get hit with. And you wonder why your taxes are so high?

(I'll probably get it from both sides on this one.)

Random Shots in the Dark (10)

Almost lost in all the hubbub of the past few days are the following little tidbits designed to make our day:

Been watching the latest "Bachelor"? No, neither have I. My wife, however, is a faithful devotee, so I am exposed to snippets as I walk through the living room. Of course, it's the same old scenario. A bunch of catty young babes getting their 15 minutes of fame and mouthing the same old lines as all the previous babes. I have a word of advice for the latest Lothario, Jason or Jarred, or whatever his name is; get the hell outta there and jump on the next flight to Bangkok. That's right.


Real bachelors in Bangkok without roses. (Somebody better tell the old guy his girlfriend is a guy.)



Now that Obama has ordered the closing of Gitmo, the question now is-what do you do with these 250 killers? Bring them to US shores, you suggest? Say hello to the lawyers and judges. Heck, say hello to the terrorists themselves as they get out on bail and start showing up on your street corners. That's right.

Meanwhile, Change has come to America. Like having a Treasury secretary who uses Turbo-Tax and neglects to pay $34,000 of his "fair share". Like having a secretary of State whose part-time husband gets millions from countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Like having an attorney general who was involved in the pardons of Marc Rich and FALN terrorists.

Change?

Meanwhile, in Kalifornia, we still don't have a budget for 2009 (the fiscal year started July 1)as our Governator and legislature still try to raise taxes in a state with the highest income tax, highest sales tax, highest car tax in the nation and highest business tax in the West. Oh well. A few more months and we won't have to worry about the 2009 budget because fiscal year 2009 will be gone. No budget-no problem I always say. Dat's right.



"Budget? Ve don't need no schtinking budget."


The last three nights, I have flipped over to MSNBC and Keith Olbermann just to see what he is talking about since the new president arrived. George Bush, naturally. Looks like Krazy Keith and his band of agreers (Rachel Maddow, Eugene (Chuckles) Robinson and Richard Wolffe (that's two "f"s and and an "e", folks) are drafting up a world-wide indictment of Bush for war crimes. Looks like there won't be any Change in "Countdown's" format.





I wonder just how much of the Caroline Kennedy fiasco the New York Times will decide is "fit to print"(inside joke).





I still think Terry Bradshaw would have been a great pick.




What? Not from New York, you say?

Since when did that ever make a difference?

Not qualified, you say?

Since when did that ever make a difference?

Too dumb, you say?

Since when did that ever make a difference?

Too ugly, you say?

Now that makes a difference.


Meanwhile in Illinois, sculptors have been seen at the future mausoleum of Senator Roland Burris, carving tools in hand looking for space to insert the latest entry on his resume. God forbid this boob ever becomes president. Can you say.....





Hey, whatever happened to John Edwards?



Wrong picture.

The Caroline Kennedy Mess- A National Embarrassment

Now that Caroline Kennedy has issued a sudden midnight withdrawal from Senate consideration, questions are arising-and will continue to arise in the days and weeks ahead. This can only be a massive embarrassment for Ms Kennedy, the entire process and the State of New York. The initial reports are ugly and will probably get uglier.

Tonight, the New York Post is quoting an anonymous source-close to Governor David Paterson- who is saying that a combination of factors led to Ms Kennedy's abrupt withdrawal; nanny problems, income tax problems and personal issues, which until further corroborated, are better left unsaid.

Tonight, all kinds of speculation are running amok as to how this unfolded. Some see the dark hand of the Clintons in derailing Ms Kennedy's drive to become the Senator from New York. To me, all of this is speculation. What is not speculation is that this does not speak well for our political system, at least as it pertains to appointments. First we have seen the sleazy process in Illinois, which has led to a criminal indictment of a sitting governor, now this cutthroat process in New York.

Pending the release of further information, I don't know whether to sympathize with Ms Kennedy or not. I don't think she was qualified to be a US Senator in the first place. I don't think she had the experience, nor do I think she acquitted herself well in her campaign to be appointed. She could not articulate why she should be a senator, nor could she articulate herself well at all. Her speech is riddled with verbal tics, like "you know, you know", which caused many to write her off, rightfully or wrongfully.

Was her desire to succeed Hillary Clinton derailed by vicious back-stabbing and rumor-mongering? Who knows? As painful as it may be for her personally, I would like to see the full-story come out. That way, the public can see how sausages are made in the State of New York-much as we have seen how sausages are made in the State of Illinois. We all know political reform is necessary in our country, but it takes public awareness to make it happen. Only when the public rises up and demands professionalism and decency in government, will real changes for the better come about.

Celebrity Endorsements - Michael Jackson for Toys R Us

Here is Michael Jackson for Toys R Us:


"With Valentine's Day approaching, there is only one place I go to find the perfect gift for "that special someone" that he will always remember. Toys R us."

Another Shameful Victory for the Universal Gutless Left

Geert Wilders

Cross-posted from Radarsite

From CBC News


"Amsterdam's Court of Appeal has ordered the prosecution of outspoken Dutch politician Geert Wilders for hate-speech, related to his anti-Islamic film, Fitna.

In a decision posted on Wednesday, the court called on public prosecutors to begin a case against the right-wing, anti-immigration politician over statements he made in interviews, in editorials and in his 15-minute film, released last March on the internet.

The court singled out Wilders for insulting comments likening elements of the Muslim faith to Nazism and calling the Qur'an "a fascist book."

"The court considers this so insulting for Muslims that it is in the public interest to prosecute Wilders," a summary of the court's decision said.

Commenting to Dutch media, Wilders called it a "black day for myself and for freedom of speech."

Wilders' short film, which drew widespread condemnation and protests in Muslim countries, intersperses violent, graphic imagery — including from the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States and the beheading of a Caucasian man – with quotations from the Qur'an, Islam's holy book.

It ends with text saying Islam "seeks to destroy our Western civilization" and a caricature of Muhammad, his head drawn in the shape of a bomb that explodes into a crack of thunder and lightning.

The title, Fitna, refers to a Qur'anic term for "strife."

Wednesday's decision overturns the one made by the Dutch public prosecutor's office last year. After a six-month investigation, the office had decided not to pursue a case against Wilders, saying his remarks did not amount to a punishable offence."

Fousesquawk comment: This is just an example of what is going on in The Netherlands, the most-screwed up county in Europe-a country that dares to tolerate the intolerable. This episode ranks alongside the time when a Dutch informer tipped off the Gestapo to Ann Frank's hiding place during the German occupation.* (After reflection- and a little scolding from the comments section- maybe that is a bit of hyperbole; they are not equal in degree.)

This is a country that lives in fear of its Muslim population, many of whom are young Moroccan punks that roam in gangs, assault Jews on the streets and even assault their teachers in the classroom. The blog "The Dutch Report" has a video of just such an assault in a city near Utrecht (I am still trying to get it up here.) You can see it here.

http://dutchreport.blogspot.com/2005/01/moroccan-youth-at-school.html

...and in Anaheim (January 18, 2009)

Anti-Israel counter-demonstrators at a pro-Israel march in Anaheim on January 18,2009

The swastikas on the posters are super-imposed over the Star of David (click to enlarge).

(Photos courtesy of the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism)

Celebrity Endorsements - Timothy Geithner for Turbo-Tax

"I saved over $34,000 in taxes while using Turbo-Tax!"

-Timothy Geithner, Treasury Secretary-designate for Turbo-Tax

Celebrity Endorsements - OJ Simpson for Hertz

"......and the best thing about renting at Hertz is the new express check-in, where you can do directly to your car without wasting time at the check-in counter- always important when you are running from the law."

-OJ Simpson for Hertz

Reverend Joseph Lowery's Words at the Inauguration

"We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, where brown can stick around, when yella' will be mella', when the red man can get ahead, man- and when white will embrace what is right. Let all of those who will do justice and love mercy say 'Amen'. AMEN! Say AMEN."

-Reverend Joseph Lowery at the inauguration of Barack Obama, January 20, 2009


I don't want to pile on too hard on Reverend Joseph Lowery for his comments at the inauguration yesterday, but I do think some comment is warranted.

First of all, I respect what Lowery has done in his life as a veteran of the civil rights struggle, and, unlike some others, I would not call him a racist because of those remarks. (After all, he is a friend of Sean Hannity from the days when Hannity was a radio host in Atlanta.)

Yet, this is not the first time, Lowery has raised my eyebrows with his comments. Several years ago, he spoke publicly and dismissively about former segregationist governor of Alabama George Wallace (then-already deceased). Wallace, late in life, crippled and in poor health, had publicly repented his past as a segregationist and asked for forgiveness from black Americans-forgiveness that Lowery, a Christian minister could not extend. Instead, he mocked Wallace.

Then there was Lowery's disgusting reference to WMDs at the funeral of Coretta Scott King with President and Mrs Bush seated behind him. It simply was not the time nor the place.

Now this reference to whites embracing "right" as if it were in the future. Once again, it was neither the time nor the place. I wonder how all those white people in the freezing cold, people who had probably voted for Obama and were there to celebrate the day, must have felt. Did any turn around and go home?

I think it is time for Reverend Lowery to give some credit to American society for the changes that have been made in the past forty years which have culminated in the election of Barack Obama as our 44th president. Most of what we witnessed yesterday was uplifting and spoke well of what the nation has accomplished. Once again, Lowery's words were dismissive and out of place. I would like to think he is better than that.

Thank You, President Bush

Dear President Bush,

As you return home to Texas to enjoy your retirement, I think that it is entirely appropriate for one American to sincerely thank you for what you have done as president. Yes, your poll numbers are low at the moment. They are perhaps even lower around the world-in countries that don't do much to make this a better world yet love to bash our country. I do believe, however, that history will judge your presidency much kindlier than today's pundits. So I would like to thank you for what you did.

Thank you for protecting our country after 9-11.

Thank you for fighting back against Islamic terror.

Thank you for driving the Taliban from Afghanistan and giving the Afghans a chance to live in freedom.

Thank you for ridding Iraq and the world of Saddam Hussein and giving the Iraqis a chance to live in freedom.

Thank you for taking out two of the most brutal regimes in recent memory.

Thank you for doing what you thought was right in spite of public opinion polls and world opionion.

Thank you for being a strong leader.

Thank you for lowering our taxes.

Thank you for appointing sensible judges both to the Supreme Court and the federal bench.

Thank you for not lowering yourself to the level of many of your detractors in Congress and the media who called you every name in the book while you never lashed back.

Thank you for your commitment to fighting AIDS in Africa.

Thank you for commuting the sentences of ex-Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.

Thank you for having a White House and administration that wasn't filled with corruption like your predecessor's.

Thank you for being a good and decent man.

God bless you and Laura, President Bush.

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk

Professor Elizabeth Alexander

Elizabeth Alexander- literary giant



"Roses are red,
violets are blue,
my car is green,
my house is orange"

I was reminded of the above while I listened to Elizabeth Alexander read her poem yesterday at the Obama inaugural. Now, let me confess at the outset that I know little or nothing about poetry, except that it is supposed to rhyme-or has that gone out of style? Frankly, I thought the lady was breaking down the upcoming Super Bowl game except she never mentioned who was going to win. I've heard more sensible prose in barrooms at closing time.

"One, two, three, four,
what time is it?"

The only time in my life I ever did any research about poetry was when I was writing my books about the languages of the former Soviet republics and Papiamentu, a creole language spoken in the Dutch Antilles. Since poets usually have a lot to do with the development and standardization of languages, it was necessary for me to learn about the important poets of those respective languages who played important roles.

Hopefully, such will not be the case for Ms Alexander. If this is an example of modern poetry, then it must rank alongside what modern art did to art and hip-hop did to music (destroyed them).

Check this one out and note it's message.


..."from this table, I’d spirit
his knives and cut out his black heart,
seal it with science fluid inside
a bell jar, place it on a low
shelf in a white man’s museum
so the whole world could see
it was shriveled and hard,
geometric, deformed, unnatural."

From "The Venus Hottentot"
(a poem about slavery in Europe)


Or these lines excerpted from "Neonatology":

“a soggy, bloody crotch, is.....

“sharp jets of breast milk shot straight across the room,

“is gaudy, mustard-colored poop, is.....

“postpartum tears that soak the baby’s lovely head.

“Shockingly vital, mammoth giblet,

“the second living thing to break free

“of my body in fifteen minutes.

“The midwife presents it on a platter."


As Lawrence Welk used to say, "Ah horrible, ah horrible ah".

That's how you get a PHD, folks. Yep, Dr Alexander has all the requisite degrees, honors and awards from the hallowed halls of academia-too numerous to list here on my humble little blog. She is a pal of Obama from Chicago and is now a professor of English and African-American Studies at ..ahem...Yale University.

"All rise!"

So now that Bill Clinton has dropped Maya Angelou on us, we get Elizabeth Alexander. Frankly, I'm up to here with poetry, especially after seeing all these dopey pro-Hamas rallies going on here in the States, you know, like...

"From the river to the sea,
Palestine will be free"

(Actually it sounds pretty good with a bullhorn-better than something about a baby being born.)

Hey, that rhymes! I'm a poet and don't know it.

Meanwhile, Back in Gaza, Hamas Honors the "Ceasefire"

No, folks, that's not fireworks in Washington DC. That is just one of 8 rockets fired into Southern Israel on Tuesday by those "freedom fighters" from Hamas.

Hold on There, Hillary!

"Who dares challenge my accession?"

"Cornyn."

President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama


Since I only have an afternoon class to teach at UC-Irvine, I was able to watch almost all of the festivities on TV from out here in Southern California. Now, at the end of the day, I want to write down my thoughts.

Though I am an Obama critic, there is nothing negative I can say about him tonight. He and Michelle have acquitted themselves beautifully today and with great grace. His speech was not the usual stem winder, rather it was short, sober and succinct. He is my president now, and in a time of great challenge for our nation, I wish him well. I can only hope that he will steer a middle course. If he does, I think he can have a successful presidency. We should all hope that his is a successful presidency. Does that mean I won't criticize him when I think appropriate? No, I will continue to exercise my freedom of speech, which this great country allows us to do.

Nevertheless, this was an historic day, and what left the most lasting impression on me was seeing the expressions on the faces of so many African-Americans in the crowd in Washington. One cannot help but be touched by that sight and what President Barack Obama means to them. I hope he will not let them down. Black America has so many challenges, but if this gives them the feeling that they can indeed make it in our country, then who can feel bad about that? Perhaps this will refute the messages of people like Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright and the New Black Panther Party. But who knows? Tonight Washington DC is a city celebrating across all racial lines. Can it last?

As I write this, I just watched him at the Commander-in-Chief Ball talking via satellite with a group of Illinois soldiers serving in Afghanistan and polling them on the important question-were they Cub fans or White Sox fans? (Obama is a White Sox fan.) Being a Cub fan, it brought a smile to my usually cynical face-especially when most of the troops said they were Cub fans.

There were a couple of bad moments. Of course, the first was the seizure of Senator Ted Kennedy that necessitated taking him to the hospital. Sadly, as President Bush appeared on the dais for the swearing-in ceremony, some nitwits on the west side of the Capitol began chanting that stupid "Na na, na na- hey, hey,hey-goodbye" chant. Bush, in his always graceful manner, ignored them. This is the man who had eggs thrown at his car in the first inaugural in 2001. This is the man who for eight years was called every name in the book by his political opponents. Today, as always, he bore it with dignity.

In that same vein, the incident was reported by some reporter for National Public Radio (NPR) with some degree of amusement. This from that "non-partisan", publicly funded radio channel. And just last night on MSNBC, that jerk Keith Olbermann was again calling on Obama to prosecute Bush for war crimes and conducting torture of the poor terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (he was waterboarded).

Then there was Her Royal Highness, Hillary Clinton, button-holing Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) at the luncheon in the Rotunda and engaging him in a heated conversation as to why he was insisting on an open debate and up or down vote on her confirmation hearing-as opposed to a rubber stamp acclamation. (Cornyn is concerned about the conflict of interest issue-as he and everybody else should be.)

But enough of the negative. I won't even go into a discussion of that awful "poet", Elizabeth Alexander and her rambling whatever-it-was she read. I had never heard of her, so I did a little Googling, and....if you've never read any of her "poetry"....you don't want to.

But enough of the negative. Congratulations to President Obama. What this remarkable man has accomplished is mind-boggling, and I wish him well in his presidency. This country needs him to be successful. I am not so jubilant about him as millions of others, but anyone who loves their country has to wish him well.

Can You Identify This Picture?

a Figure 8 stock car race
b Mid East peace process
c Congressmen at work
d West Virginia State Highway 1
e Jihadists on the road to Paradise
f UN diplomats looking for a parking place in NYC
g "Countdown" on Keith Olbermann

A Complete History of the Palestinian Nation

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Great Moments in Canadian History

1944- Canadian troops landing at Normandy





1979- Canadian Embassy in Teheran hides American Embassy personnel and saves them from being taken hostage by Iranian barbarians




1992- Toronto Blue Jays win first World Series championship




2009- Canadian Immigration authorities turn William Ayres away at border and refuse him entry into Canada (OK, so that's not really William Ayres, but it happened anyway.)

Steelers and Cardinals

As a lifelong Steeler fan (since 1955), I am obviously happy that the Steelers are going back to the Super Bowl with a chance to win a record 6th Super Bowl title. I am also happy to see the Cardinals going as well. They are a decades old-league doormat that has finally, for the first time since 1948, made it to the championship game. While I never had any emotional attachment to the Cardinals, I would say they were the franchise in the NFC I liked the best.

When (at the age of ten), I began to root for the Steelers, they were a traditional doormat in the NFL's Eastern Division. Since their inception in 1933, they had never won a divisional title, in fact, they usually finished last in their division. It wasn't until 1972 that they won their division for the first time. I was present in San Diego when they beat the Chargers 24-2 to clinch that championship. The first playoff game was decided by Franco Harris' Immaculate Reception" to beat the Raiders. The following week, they lost to Miami. Two years later, they won the first of their 5 Super Bowls. Since then, they have been strong most every year.

But even as the Steelers were turning a woeful franchise into one of the NFL's most successful, the Cardinals languished, first in Chicago playing in old Comiskey Park, then St Louis and now Phoenix. Their last NFL championship was 1947, a record of sports franchise futility exceeded only by the Chicago Cubs.

This year wasn't expected to be much different though they were in a weak division, which allowed them to get into the playoffs with a 9-7 record.

The rest is known to the reader, so let me close by saying that I view this as a very attractive match up, which most fans probably don't. I will, of course, be pulling intensely for the Steelers. But if the Cardinals do win, there will be a consolation.

The Anti-Israel Rallies-What is This Talk of Hitler and Ovens?

At the recent rally against Israel in Ft Lauderdale, a young woman in a hijab has been caught on tape shouting at counter-protesters, "Go back to the ovens!" "You need a bigger oven!" Similarly, at a recent anti-Israel rally in front of the Israeli Consulate in Los Angeles on January 6, a couple of young men in kaffiyas are seen on tape yelling, Long Live Hitler", "Hitler Rest in peace", "Jews are fossil fuel", Put Jews in the ovens", and "Hey, Jews, F---them", as others laughed and whooped it up.

Don't take my word for it. Watch the below videos taken from the above referenced demonstrations.








http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpMbUliY3Ao



No matter how you feel about the current Israel-Palestinian conflict, you have to stop and wonder about much of the rhetoric coming from the Palestinian supporters at rallies taking place in the US. While the Arab/Muslim community is speaking out strongly about the recent events, they are also being aided and abetted by the radical American groups like A.N.S.W.E.R., as well as other anarchistic and socialistic groups, but it seems that the Middle Easterners are using expecially inciteful rhetoric. I think it is time that America's Muslim community be asked a simple question; do you hate Jews?

And why not ask them that question? Expressions of Jew hatred can be found in the Qu'ran and Hadiths. It is a known fact (though not reported in the media) that Mein Kampf is a best seller in the Middle East to this day. Hitler is indeed revered by millions of Muslims. Now we have the ugly specter of some Muslim demonstrators spouting the vilest expressions of Jew hatred ever heard-using none other than Adolf Hitler as an inspiration. It is also a fact (also ignored by the media) that almost one million Jews were driven from Arab lands after 1948. Few still live in Muslim countries today.

This is a topic that cannot be ignored or swept under the rug. If anti-Semitism in America is on the rise and being fueled by recent Muslim immigrants (and their children), it must be addressed directly-including by our president, who needs to speak out on this issue. Muslims must understand that we are not willing to allow them to import their ancient hatred of Jews into our country and stoke the fires of hate on our soil. Anti-Semitism, while it has historically shown itself on our shores, is not an American value. And as former Australian Prime Minister John Howard publicly told the Muslim community in his country a few years back, "if you cannot assimilate and accept our values-then leave."

There is absolutely no room in the US for these kinds of expressions directed toward our Jewish citizens. History has shown us where it can lead.

The Border Patrol Commutations

As a former federal law enforcement officer having written before on the case of Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos, I am gratified and relieved that President Bush has granted commutations to the ex-Border Patrol agents involved in the shooting of Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, a drug smuggler who was fleeing back to Mexico when wounded.

It is true that there were troubling aspects to the agents' actions. Federal agents are not supposed to shoot at fleeing felons unless there is a danger to the agent(s) or bystanders posed by the felon. The agents maintained that they had seen what they thought was a weapon in Davila's hand. Normally, that explanation should be given credence in the minds of the jurors as opposed to the words of the drug smuggler. Yet, they apparently chose to believe the words and testimony of Davila (who was given immunity by the government to testify). It is likely that the actions of the agents in cleaning up the scene of spent cartridges and their post-incident reports damaged their own credibility. I don't know.

I do think, however, that the 11-12 year sentences handed down were excessive. They also sent a message to the Border Patrol that they had less than 100% support for their mission from a Bush Administration that showed little interest in thwarting illegal immigration.

It appears that Bush pardons will be few. That is the way it should be. In general, I am an opponent of pardons unless they are based on a belief by the President that a miscarriage of justice was done or the sentences were excessive. What has soured me on the pardon process is the corruption of said process by Bill Clinton and the former Governor of Tennessee, Ray Blanton, who went to prison for selling pardons. It has also been reported that no pardon has been granted to former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens. The charges leveled are much too serious, and, without pre-judging his case, there is no indication at this point that a miscarriage of justice is in progress.

I will be happy if no further pardons or commutations are handed out by President Bush in the next 24 hours. I do believe, however, that these commutations were the right thing to do.

Pacifism and Peace (Continued)

Martin Luther King



Mohatmas Gandhi



In response to my last peace on "Pacifism and Peace", one of my co-respondents (Lance) has pointed out the examples of Martin Luther King and Mohatmas Gandhi, two apostles of peace and non-violence who achieved great success in bringing reform to the United States and India respectively. I think his point is worthy of a longer response, so here goes.

The point of my original article is that pacifism in the face of evil does not bring peace. As examples, I used Code Pink and Adolf Hitler. The implication was obvious given world events. I was equating Hitler to Hamas. In terms of degree, perhaps not a fair comparison, but I consider Hamas evil because they use terror as a tactic, desire no negotiated settlement and want to destroy the State of Israel. My point was that pacifism toward Hamas and their terror tactics is useless.

As for Gandhi and King, that is a different situation. Both men led protests against injustices in India (a British colony at the time) and the US. Their efforts were anything but futile. India gained independence, and King (though assassinated) inspired a nation to end segregation and protect the rights of black people. The important difference here is that both men were operating in countries and systems that were fundamentally civilized, decent, and grounded in the idea of equality (even if not always practiced). Both nations were able to reform their inequalities peacefully within the system without the need for a violent revolution.

Lance, in his retort, points out the lynchings of blacks that occurred in the US South. Indeed, those were barbarous practices, often carried out with the acquiescence and/or participation of local law enforcement officers. Yet, never did they represent something that was legal, nor were they approved of by the United States Government. Beginning in the Civil Rights era, the Federal Government began investigating such crimes. True, many local all-white juries often acquitted defendants, but even today, state murder charges or federal civil rights charges are being brought against those men who did these crimes decades ago. (The civil rights charges are a tool used by the US Government when state prosecutions have been thwarted.)

Let me turn to the Palestinian issue. Since Israel is a democracy and a civilized state, I firmly believe that had the Palestinians emulated the practice of Gandhi and King, they would have reached a settlement with Israel and had their own state decades ago. Indeed, all they had to do was accept the 1948 arrangement, which would have set up two states. Instead, the whole Arab world rejected it and turned to war. Then, unable to defeat Israel by force of arms, the Palestinians turned to terror-killing innocent civilians, not only of Israel but other nations as well.

So can the Israelis practice pacifism in the face of those who hate Jews and want to wipe their country off the face of the map? I say no more than they could have with Hitler. Sadly, Martin Luther King and Mohatmas Gandhi would have achieved nothing against Hitler and the Nazis. They would have been arrested and never heard from again. (Yes, I know that both men were arrested in their own countries, but for very short periods, and they were quickly released. Let me also point out that their assassinations were not orchestrated by the American or British governments.)

In short, people like King and Gandhi are usually successful in decent countries when their cause is just and the population sees that changes are needed. When they are dealing with corrupt, brutal governments or other entities that want only their death and destruction, they can accomplish nothing except garner international support (which Israel has little of). The only solution for a government like Hitler's was to overthrow it. The Germans were unable to do that; thus, it took a horrific war to remove Hitler. And yes, tragically, millions of innocent Germans (and Japanese) had to die because of their evil governments.

People like Hamas, Hezbollah, the radical Islamic terrorist organizations, and the government of Iran are not interested in negotiated settlements unless as a ruse or to provide a needed temporary respite. Their ultimate goals remain unchanged-to eliminate Israel and spread Islam world-wide even by force if necessary.

In dealing with people like Hitler, Hamas and Islamic-terror, there is only surrender or fight.

Pacifism and Peace

Pacifism in the face of evil doesn't bring peace.




Hitler Enters Prague

Pacifism in the face of evil brings slavery.




Berlin 1945

What brings peace is a just and successful war.

Ban Ki-Moon Calls for Cease Fire and Israeli Withdrawal From Gaza

This is what the UN is trying to rescue



BEIRUT, Jan 17 (Reuters) - "U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said on Saturday that if Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire in the Gaza Strip it should include a timetable for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Hamas-ruled enclave.

Israel is planning to announce on Saturday a halt to its three-week Gaza offensive without any deal with Hamas, an Israeli official said.

Ban said he could not confirm whether Israel would declare a halt to the fighting, though he hoped it would.

"This unilateral declaration should be accompanied by a timetable for Israeli withdrawal," Ban told reporters in the Lebanese capital Beirut.

Ban confirmed that he would be attending a summit meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt on Sunday organized by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to discuss Gaza. (Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Dominic Evans)"



Well, isn't that nice? Once again, the UN calls for a cease fire every time Israel fights back. Where was the UN as Hamas was lobbing rockets into southern Israel. Did they ever call for a halt to that-or take concrete steps to end it? How many times Did Ban-Ki-Moon or any of his woeful predecessors ever go to the Middle East to try and stop the terrorist acts upon Israeli civilians?

But as soon as Israel goes after the Hamas killers (or Hezbollah killers), all the terrorists have to do is take shelter among innocent civilians, show the media the dead and presto! The whole world, the EU and the UN all call for a cease-fire, which only means that the Israelis cease operations, withdraw and hunker down for the next wave of rockets and terrorist attacks. They can't even build a wall to keep out suicide bombers without these same bodies and the ubiquitous Jimmy Carter crawling out of the woodwork.

For all you outraged Americans who are taking to the streets to condemn Israel, ask yourselves this simple question; imagine if Cuba were launching rockets into Miami and other parts of South Florida, resulting in the deaths of innocent civilians. What would you expect the US to do? Would you expect the US to go to the UN and ask them to demand a cease fire from Cuba? Ask the UN to issue a few resolutions, perhaps? Go to the EU and asked them to stop all trade with Cuba or place an embargo upon that country?

Or would you invade Cuba and take out the killers? And suppose the Cuban troops all donned civilian clothes and fought back from civilian centers like schools, hospitals, and crowded residential areas? Would you expect the American military to stop operations and withdraw back to the USA?

Here is my fervent hope: I hope that Israel ignores calls for a cease fire and finishes the job of killing the Hamas terrorists. Then I hope they turn to Hezbollah and finish that job as well.

And the UN, the EU and world opinion? They can all take a giant leap as far as I am concerned. If they insist on siding with terrorists, then their voices should be ignored.

Sooner or later, sensible people must realize that Israel's fight is our fight, their enemies our enemies. Israel is fighting the battle (in self-defense) that the whole civilized world should be fighting. It is not about the rights of Arabs who conveniently identify themselves as "Palestinians", a questionable term that has never represented any national or government entity in recorded history. It is about the fact that the Arab world that abounds Israel cannot accept the idea of a Jewish (or any non-Muslim state) in the region. These so-called Palestinians could have had their "Palestinian State" as far back as 1948. Instead, they rejected the two-state solution and drew their swords-because they wanted it all-and still do, no matter what their spokesmen may tell you from time to time. Read the Hamas charter. It calls for the destruction of the Jewish state. Read the words of Ahmedinejad of Iran who has publicly stated that he wants to wipe Israel off the map.

May God forgive us if we stand aside and let these terrorist barbarians who go by the name of Hamas, Hezbollah (and Iran) destroy Israel and create another Holocaust in the process.

Paul "The Worm" Krugman Strikes Again

Paul "The Worm" Krugman


There are few editorialists who are more contemptible than Paul "The Worm" Krugman. I call him "The Worm" because he delights in using his pen to attack those with whom he disagrees until someone confronts him face to face-like Bill O'Reilly. Then he all but crawls under the table in looking for a place to hide.

Of course, President Bush is far too gentlemanly to hit back. He has withstood the slings and arrows of his attackers for 8 years without sinking to their level. Therefore, worms like Krugman just keep on attacking.

Witness Krugman's latest broadside against Bush in the New York Times, yet another call for the Obama Administration to investigate and prosecute Bush and others in his administration for imagined crimes.

Below is Krugman's hit piece, interspersed with my comments. Krugman's words are in quotes and italics.

"Last Sunday President-elect Barack Obama was asked whether he would seek an investigation of possible crimes by the Bush administration. 'I don’t believe that anybody is above the law,' he responded, but “we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”

"I’m sorry, but if we don’t have an inquest into what happened during the Bush years —and nearly everyone has taken Mr. Obama’s remarks to mean that we won’t — this means that those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.Let’s be clear what we’re talking about here. It’s not just torture and illegal wiretapping, whose perpetrators claim, however implausibly, that they were patriots acting to defend the nation’s security. The fact is that the Bush administration’s abuses extended from environmental policy to voting rights. And most of the abuses involved using the power of government to reward political friends and punish political enemies."

Torture and illegal wiretapping: What Krugman is referring to here is water boarding and the NSA intercepts of overseas calls from known or suspected terrorists to the US in the wake of 9-11. These were actions used not to maintain political power as Saddam Hussein and countless other dictators have done-but to protect American lives and prevent future 9-11s. In the case of the wiretaps, Bush received legal counsel-rightfully or wrongfully- that told him such action was legal. Yet Krugman wants Bush and everyone else who carried out such acts to be prosecuted-including those who water boarded people like the poor terrorist mastermind, Mr Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, that prevented planned terrorist attacks and saved countless lives.

In the above paragraph, Krugman also refers to such crimes as Bush's environmental policy and voting rights! What crimes would these be, Mr Krugman? Are you referring to the Kyoto Treaty and all those poor voters in Florida who didn't get their votes counted a third time in the 2000 election?

"At the Justice Department, for example, political appointees illegally reserved nonpolitical positions for “right-thinking Americans” — their term, not mine — and there’s strong evidence that officials used their positions both to undermine the protection of minority voting rights and to persecute Democratic politicians."

Nice throw-out lines, Mr Krugman, but would you care to be specific as to how minority voting rights were undermined? Are you saying that folks like ACORN were not adequately protected as they committed massive voter fraud? And which Democratic politicians were "persecuted"? And political influence in the Justice Department. What a novel idea. Ever heard of the Clinton Justice Department?

"The hiring process at Justice echoed the hiring process during the occupation of Iraq — an occupation whose success was supposedly essential to national security — in which applicants were judged by their politics, their personal loyalty to President Bush and, according to some reports, by their views on Roe v. Wade, rather than by their ability to do the job."

Strange analogy, to say the least. Furthermore, Krugman makes it sound like this never happened in previous administrations-like Clinton's. I am not trying to excuse this age-old custom, but is it criminal?

"Speaking of Iraq, let’s also not forget that country’s failed reconstruction: the Bush administration handed billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to politically connected companies, companies that then failed to deliver. And why should they have bothered to do their jobs? Any government official who tried to enforce accountability on, say, Halliburton quickly found his or her career derailed."

If Mr Krugman wants to prosecute every administration that had this problem, he could start with Washington and continue through Bush.

"There’s much, much more. By my count, at least six important government agencies experienced major scandals over the past eight years — in most cases, scandals that were never properly investigated. And then there was the biggest scandal of all: Does anyone seriously doubt that the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation into invading Iraq?"

Yes, I seriously doubt that. Whatever history decides on the wisdom of Iraq, I believe Bush was acting on intelligence provided to him. If Bush lied on WMD, then so did Clinton, Albright, Berger, Cohen, Gore, the CIA, the British, Israeli intelligence services and countless others. Even leading Democratic politicians believed in WMD, such as John Kerry, Hillary Clinton etc. If you don't believe that, go back to their own public declarations at the time. (They were also briefed.)

And those six government agencies that experienced major scandals? Is he referring to the agencies that were under Clinton cabinet secretaries like Hazel O'Leary, Ron Brown, Janet Reno (and Erik Holder), Alexis Herman and Henry Cisneros? Is he referring to the scandals of the (Erik Holder OK'd) pardons to Marc Rich, FALN terrorists, the leaders of the New York Hasidic Jewish community (that switched their votes from traditionally Republican to Hillary Clinton in 2000 in exchange for pardons), or the Secret Service, whose director tried to assert a non-existent right of privilege to keep his agents from being called to a grand jury to testify about Monica Lewinsky?

"Why, then, shouldn't’t (sic) we have an official inquiry into abuses during the Bush years?

One answer you hear is that pursuing the truth would be divisive, that it would exacerbate partisanship. But if partisanship is so terrible, shouldn't’t (sic) there be some penalty for the Bush administration’s politicization of every aspect of government?"

Again, start with Washington and keep on going. By the way, Mr Krugman, politicization of government, while certainly lamentable, is not, in and of itself, a crime.

"Alternatively, we’re told that we don’t have to dwell on past abuses, because we won’t repeat them. But no important figure in the Bush administration, or among that administration’s political allies, has expressed remorse for breaking the law. What makes anyone think that they or their political heirs won’t do it all over again, given the chance?

In fact, we’ve already seen this movie. During the Reagan years, the Iran-contra conspirators violated the Constitution in the name of national security. But the first President Bush pardoned the major malefactors, and when the White House finally changed hands the political and media establishment gave Bill Clinton the same advice it’s giving Mr. Obama: let sleeping scandals lie. Sure enough, the second Bush administration picked up right where the Iran-contra conspirators left off — which isn’t too surprising when you bear in mind that Mr. Bush actually hired some of those conspirators."

Interesting that, as Krugman raises the specter of other administrations committing abuses, the only mention of Clinton is to "advice" he received from the media to "let sleeping dogs lie". I think it is clear that George Bush, himself, was loathe to authorize an investigation into the abuses of the Clinton years.

"Now, it’s true that a serious investigation of Bush-era abuses would make Washington an uncomfortable place, both for those who abused power and those who acted as their enablers or apologists. And these people have a lot of friends. But the price of protecting their comfort would be high: If we whitewash the abuses of the past eight years, we’ll guarantee that they will happen again."

Oh, they will happen again alright, Mr Krugman. Already we have a cabinet forming of a Secretary of State who will be negotiating Middle East issues with governments that have poured millions into her husband's, coffers, a Treasury Secretary who neglected to pay over $34,000 in income tax, and an Attorney General up to his neck in the corrupt pardons of Marc Rich, and FALN terrorists who hadn't even asked for a pardon.

"Meanwhile, about Mr. Obama: while it’s probably in his short-term political interests to forgive and forget, next week he’s going to swear to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” That’s not a conditional oath to be honored only when it’s convenient.

"And to protect and defend the Constitution, a president must do more than obey the Constitution himself; he must hold those who violate the Constitution accountable. So Mr. Obama should reconsider his apparent decision to let the previous administration get away with crime. Consequences aside, that’s not a decision he has the right to make."

Maybe Mr Obama, knowing he lives in a glass house, is smart enough not to throw stones.

Of course, anyone familiar with Paul Krugman knows that he has a far-left political agenda. How else could he seriously call for a criminal investigation into the Bush Administration while ignoring one of the most corrupt administrations in US history (Clinton)? Krugman, of course, is an economist, not a legal scholar. He might want to stop and reflect that before he calls for prosecutions, he should find some actual crimes. A better place to start would be in the Clinton Administration.

"America's Sheriff" Guilty on One Count

Ex-Orange County (Ca) Sheriff Mike Carona


This morning a federal jury in Santa Ana, California returned verdicts of "not guilty" on 5 of 6 counts in former Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's corruption trial. Carona was convicted on one count of witness tampering. The overall verdict is being received with a general sense of shock by the local media.

As the verdicts were read, Carona began sobbing and laid his head on the table in front of him. He remains free pending sentencing on the one count of witness tampering, in which he faces a maximum sentence of 5 years.

This verdict will probably add to California's reputation as a place where high-profile defendants are difficult to prosecute. Add Carona to OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson, Robert Blake and Phil Spector, previous famous defendants who were acquitted. In this case, the most damning evidence was the taped recordings of Carona's own words to Don Haidl. Yet, it appears the jurors chose not to believe their lying ears.

One local radio station reporter, in reporting the verdicts direct from the courtroom, speculated that the not guilty verdicts might endanger the plea deals that co-conspirators Don Haidl and George Jaramillo made with the government based on the fact that guilty verdicts were not reached (except for one count). That is absolutely incorrect. First of all, the government's deal with a cooperating defendant or co-conspirator does not hinge on guilty verdicts. That is in the hands of the jury. As long as the government is satisfied that the cooperating defendant fully upheld his/her end of the deal and testified truthfully, the verdict does not matter. In the case of Haidl, however, there is a suspicion he may have perjured himself in his testimony when he testified that he had never engaged in illegal campaign activities with others besides Carona. If that is, in fact, the case, then his deal might be in jeopardy. As for Jaramillo, the government chose not to call him as a witness.

As a former law enforcement officer with strong feelings about corruption, I sincerely hope Carona gets the maximum 5 years. There are few things worse than corruption in law enforcement, and Carona violated every trust put in him by the citizens of Orange County. He destroyed the reputation of a major law enforcement agency that is made up overwhelmingly of honest and dedicated people.

One could only hope that we shall not see his type again.

One Million Middle Eastern Jews

The below post is written by my friend and colleague Reut Cohen. Reut has her own blog at Reut R Cohen. She is a recent graduate from UC-Irvine, where she took the lead in documenting the hate speech brought onto our campus by the Muslim Student Union. For this effort, she put herself in harm's way and received no support from the university.

Reut is the descendant of Middle Eastern Jews who were driven from their homes because of the issue of the State of Israel. This is a story all but ignored by our media. It needs to be told.


"According to the definition of the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, a refugee is a person who:

Owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of their nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail him/herself of the protection of that country.

The Jewish people have had a continued presence in what are known as Arab states today since the Babylonian captivity of around 597 BCE. Discrimination against indigenous Middle Eastern Jews was continuous throughout history, particularly during the period of the rise of Islam.

With the rise of Arab nationalism in the early 1900s, Jews in what became Islamic lands found that they had become a scapegoat. No longer living under colonial rule, their situation began to worsen. Even prior to the establishment of the State of Israel, Jews found that they were being discriminated against--in many cases, being Jewish was practically outlawed.

In 1948 the Arab League declared all Jewish people enemy citizens, regardless of the fact that several had no will or motivation to leave their homes. Jewish bank accounts and property were confiscated, Jews were arrested and fired from their jobs, and synagogues were attacked. Homes were looted, women were raped and people were killed.

According to official Arab statistics, approximately 900,000 to 1,000,000 Jews left their homes in Arab countries from 1940 until the early 1970s. Over 600,000 resettled in Israel. Their descendants, and those of Iranian and Turkish Jews, now number 3.06 million of Israel's 5.4 to 5.8 million Jewish citizens, thereby accounting for more than half of Israel’s population. The plight of the Jews in Arab lands worsened following the 1967 Six-Day War, prompting the remaining Jews to flee.






Today, fewer than 3,000 Jews remain in Middle Eastern lands, many living in poverty. They also often find themselves the recipients of religious hate-crimes.

In 2007, similar resolutions (H.Res.185 and S.Res.85) were proposed to the US Senate and Congress, to:

Make clear that the United States Government supports the position that, as an integral part of any comprehensive peace, the issue of refugees and the mass violations of human rights of minorities in Arab and Muslim countries throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and the Persian Gulf must be resolved in a manner that includes (A) consideration of the legitimate rights of all refugees displaced from Arab and Muslim countries throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and the Persian Gulf; and (B) recognition of the losses incurred by Jews, Christians, and other minority groups as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict. S. Res. 85. These resolutions were discussed on July 19th 2007 at the bicameral Congressional Human Rights Caucus in preparation for voting.

Over the course of the next few days, I will publish information about Jews from several Middle Eastern lands. As a daughter of indigenous Middle Eastern Jews who were robbed of their birthright, dignity and history, I have always been deeply attached to this issue. The lack of recognition this issue receives astonishes me. I hope that I can do my part to educate others."

Reut R Cohen

Just in Case.................

Just in case you were wondering or had forgotten where my sympathies lie.

Great Ironies in History

Hillary (and Bill) Clinton set to take over Middle East diplomacy (with their financial benefactors in Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc)



Governor Rod Blogoyevich swears in Illinois Senate (that is impeaching him)




OJ Simpson sentences Nevada judge to prison



Marie Antoinette inspects new government guillotine



Saddam Hussein names new official government hangman



Ex-Justice Dept official (who created the wall between CIA and FBI) and 9-11 Commisioner Jamie Gorelick grilling a witness over 9-11 failures



Treasury Secretary-designate Tim Geithner vows to shake up the IRS

The Obama Cabinet-More "Change"

Timothy Geithner





William J Lynn III



As candidate, Barack Obama repeatedly offered us not only "Change we can believe in", but openness and transparency in government. As President-elect, he has proceeded to bring in a sackful of former Clinton Administration officials, some with questions lingering over the heads (Bill Richardson, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, etc).

Add to this list the names of Treasury Secretary-designate Tim Geithner and his pick for Asst. Secretary of Defense, William J Lynn III.

Geithner, who as Treasury Secretary, would oversee the IRS, has recently, shall we say, been overseen by the IRS. Geithner owed back taxes to the IRS in the total of $34,023 for the years 2001-2004. In 2006, he paid part of it back when that agency audited him. Then, just recently, he paid the remainder plus $8,679 in interest.

Just how recently? As soon as Obama picked him for the Treasury spot.

What is Obama's reaction? "It was an honest mistake."

Change.

Let's leave aside the question of what would happen to you and me if we owed the IRS $34,000. Doesn't this pick put the lie to Obama's claim of Change and Transparency? What goes into the thinking of pushing a man through as Treasury Secretary who failed to pay over $34,000 in back taxes-until he was audited and then nominated for the top spot at Treasury? The answer is easy; it is the same thinking that selects Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State despite the fact that her husband is receiving millions and millions of dollars from countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

Change.

Then there is Obama's selection of William J Lynn III to be Asst. Defense Secretary. Lynn, who served at Defense in the Clinton Administration, then went on to become a lobbyist for the Raytheon Corp-a defense contractor. What is the problem here?

Didn't Obama pledge that no lobbyists would hold any position in his administration?

Yes, he did-emphatically.

Yet, Obama now insists that Lynn came so highly recommended that he had to make an exception.

Change.

So where is all the change that Obama promised us? To me, it looks like business as usual in Washington. Except for Obama himself, not even the faces are new.

Anti-Israel Rally in New York City

Do you see what is happening right here in America?
(Tip of the hat to Findalis at Monkey in the Middle)

More Anti-Israel/America Protests-San Francisco

The below pictures come to us courtesy of Zombietime.com and show images of the anti-Israel rally in San Francisco on January 10-sponsored by A.N.S.W.E.R. Of course, images from San Francisco are always more disturbing than elsewhere. They are certainly more disturbing than what I saw in LA last Saturday-and that was disturbing enough. What I think you will come away with is that the protestors are more than just anti-Israel. There is an anti-Semitic element to it as well as an anti-American aspect to it. It is also clear that the usual collection of socialists and anarchists have also jumped on this issue. And finally, keep in mind that these images are not from Beirut or Cairo or Paris. They are right here in our country. In our streets. On our soil.

The full presentation can be viewed at:

http://zombietime.com/gaza_war_protest/



That could be one of my former ESL students-teaching her kids to hate early




As they like to tell us gullible Americans, "We're not against the Jews. We're just against Zionism."



Incitement to violence? I wonder which university this guy teaches at- USF, SF State?












The green flag is that of Hamas, which our country has designated as a terrorist organization.




The family that hates together stays together




Cindy Sheehan



border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5291351070856472354" />
The usual assorted anarchists join the cause of Hamas


At what point do we say, "Enough"? At what point do we stand up and tell these Hamas supporters who are taking over our streets that if they don't like our policy of supporting Israel, they can go back where they came from? Jingoistic? Perhaps, but having a bunch of Middle Eastern types shouting at us to "go home", as they did to us last Saturday, gets my nationalistic juices flowing. (Yes, I know many of these folks, especially the younger ones, are American citizens and some are even born here.)

Last Saturday in LA, a Palestinian woman stopped as she passed me and said, "Shame on you". (I was holding a poster with the Israeli flag.) I then got into a heated discussion with her about why I was supporting Israel. While I didn't lose my temper, I didn't hold anything back. I told her that I was sick of Palestinian terror, which we have witnessed for decades now. I told her that if the Palestinians had lobbied peacefully, they would have had their state decades ago. I told her that all this was not about land, but religion because the Arabs basically hated Jews (which she denied). Finally, I told her that Israel was an ally of the US, and if she didn't like that fact, she could go back where she came from. At this point, a cop motioned the lady to the other side-where the terrorist supporters were gathered.

Ok, so does this make me a racist, jingoist or Islamophobe (the new in-word)? While I won't admit to those labels, apply them if you like. I don't like terrorists. I don't like those who support terror. I don't like people who come into this country and complain about it. I don't like people who come to this country and bring their old hatreds with them. As far as I am concerned, if any of these yahoos are not citizens, they should be sent back to where they came from.

As for these American anarchist types, I have no idea what we can do with them. I do feel, however, that for them, dementia will set in at an early age since they already have a head start. In the meantime, may they all get testicular cancer.

"Ye Olde Conflicte of Intereste" The Case of Hillary Clinton

"How dare Thou question the Royal Exchequer."


A couple of years back, I wrote a spoof about Bill Clinton's inventive use of the English language. The topic was the New Revised Bill Clinton Book of English Grammar, or something like that. Now, with Hillary Clinton sailing through her Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of State, I thought it was time to search through my copy of Bill and Clinton's New Revised English Dictionary. Here is what I found:

"Conflicte of Intereste"- Archaic olde English word-now only found in certain remote parts of Scotland, meaning a situation in which someone in a position of trust, such as a lawyer, a politician, government official, executive or director of a corporation or physician, has competing professional or personal/financial interests, which make it difficult to fulfill his or her duties in an impartial manner. No longer used in American English.

Pity that the term no longer has in meaning in America since it would apply to Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State to a tee.

This is the lady who will take over negotiations with nations in the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in delicate matters involving terrorism, national security and Israel. These also happen to be countries which have poured millions of dollars into Bill Clinton's various and sundry foundations, library and other money-laundering ventures. (Yes, Bill Clinton is still Hillary's husband.)

Conflicte of intereste? What do you think?

Of course, what does that matter when you have nuggets like these being thrown out to the senators by the Grande Dame herself:

"We must use what has been called 'smart power', the full range of tools at our disposal. With 'smartpower', diplomacy will be the vanguage of foreign policy."

"America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America, The best way to advance America's interest in reducing global threats and seizing global opportunities is to design and implement global solutions. This isn't a philosophical point. This is our reality."


Only a couple of Senators on the Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar (R-IN) and David Vitter (R-DC Madame,....er LA) expressed concern over the $$$$ pouring into the Clinton coffers from the Middle East and any impact it might have on US foreign policy. Lugar, prior to the hearing, made 4 suggestions that might improve transparency in Bill's $$$$-raising. However, Her Imperial Highness made it crystal-clear in her testimony that only one of the proposals would be agreed upon with the Obama Administration.

So, conflicte or no conflicte, look for Hillary to be approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this week.

LA Tax Dollars at Work-"Gang Prevention"

Pete Carroll and Marlo "Bow Wow" Jones
"How's the missus?"


Yesterday, cops in LA charged 30-year-old Marlo "Bow Wow" Jones with robbery and burglary with the special allegation that the crime was in furtherance of a street gang. Well, that's good news, you say. Now for the bad news. You see, "Bow Wow" was part of an initiative hatched in the City of the Angels to fight gangs. In other words, Jones was one of those "former gang members" who was receiving LA tax-payers' funds to work with inner city youth to convince them not to join gangs.

This particular "former gang member" had been making appearances with USC football coach Pete Carroll and others as part of the city's gang reduction efforts. In addition, Jones, like others, was getting public funds courtesy of LA City Council member Janice ("Big Bucks") Hahn, who was doling money out in her role as an "anti-gang crusader".

Lots of money.

Jones, a "former member" of the Grape Street Crips, who had served seven years for robbery and drug violations, also pleaded guilty last October to a charge of spousal abuse and received five years probation. He was involved in a group called "Unity One", a sub-contractor of the Toberman Neighborhood Center. He is charged with being involved in a January 5 robbery of a rap-singer at the Universal City Hilton.

Nor is "Bow Wow" the only example of government largess run amok. Last year, Hector "Big Weasel" Marroquin, another "former gang member" who was working with the group, "No Guns" was busted selling assault weapons to federal undercover agents (No Guns, get it?). According to the LA Times, "Big Weasel's" group (No Guns) had received about 1.5 million dollars from the taxpayers, courtesy of "Big Bucks" Hahn.

No Guns-Big Bucks.

But make no mistake; LA's anti-gang efforts have been a "huge success", as government bureaucrats are fond of saying. Don't take my word for it. Just tune into the 11 o'clock news any night in LA. You will see just how well your tax dollars are spent.

Parallels in History

Adolf Hitler in Nuremberg 1934



Anjem Choudary in the UK



Mein Kampf in original German





Mein Kampf (Jihad) in Arabic-Still a best seller in the Middle East



Nazi/Communist street brawl-pre 1933



Malmo, Sweden, 2008



Der Stuermer, anti-Semitic Nazi newspaper



Muslim Student Union poster at UC-Irvine May 2008



Germany, April 1, 1933- "Germans, turn away. Don't buy from Jews"


"O' ye that believe, take not Jews and Christians as your friends and protectors" (Qur'an, Surah 5:54.)



Nuremberg Rally



Hamas rally



Neville Chamberlain (Peace in our time) 1938



Archbishop of Canterbury ("UK must accept Shariah law")



German army enters Paris



Paris riots



Denmark under German occupation



Danish flag burning (over Danish cartoons)



London bomb shelter, World War II



London subway bombings 2005



Hitler and Franco (Spain)



Madrid train bombing 2004



Ann Frank (Netherlands)



Netherlands, Dutch film maker, Theo van Gogh



Auschwitz oven

"Go back to the ovens! You need a bigger oven!" Muslim woman shouting at Jewish counter-demonstrators last week in Ft Lauderdale, Florida


And where does it all end?



Berlin 1945



Gaza

Keith Olbermann's Last Meal

Last night, quite by accident, I flipped on MSNBC and caught the last half of Keith Olbermann's failing show, "Countdown". With all that is going on in the world today and Barack Obama about to take office, one might have thought that Krazy Keith would be starting to introduce new acts into his freak show.

One might think again.

Like a condemned man enjoying his last meal, there was tired old Keith blasting away at President Bush again, this time dissecting the President's news conference. To help him along, there was the exquisite looking Newsweek editor, Richard Wolffe joining in on the fun. I seriously suspect Wolffe sleeps at the MSNBC studio so Keith can pull him off the shelf every night. I have no idea if Eugene (Chuckles) Robinson of the Washington Post had appeared earlier in the show, but if I had to bet my mortgage, I would say he had.

Then there was George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, who is actively feeding into Keith's sexual fantasy of having Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and all the CIA officers who water boarded people like the poor terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to be sent to The Hague-or maybe even Nuremberg as war criminals. The learned professor has already pronounced them guilty, in fact.

Why that poor Mr Mohammed probably even came down with a cold.

Then, to show that Keith has not lost his touch, he bestowed yet another "Worst Person in the World" award to his pal, Bill O'Reilly (silver, I believe). Talk about holding grudges. I remember when I was in high school, and some guy sad bad things about my girlfriend. I was so mad I beat him up-twice, in fact. But, hey! That was almost 50 years ago. I have let it go.

So Keith, maybe he did steal your high school sweetheart or something like that, but let it go, pal. Your obsession with O'Reilly makes you look like a total jerk. Besides, to O'Reilly, you don't even exist. He never even mentions your name.

Finally, Keith, there is so much going on in the world, and your hero Obama will be on the scene next week to clean it all up, so it's time to bring in a few new acts.

"Goodnight, Keith."

Unbiased Reporting?

Fact or opinion?

Ask yourself what the purpose of this Time cover is;

to inform
to persuade
to entertain

The purpose of this piece is clearly to persuade the reader of Time's point of view.

Time, like any newspaper, has, as its principle function, to inform. Within its pages are also opinion pieces, which are supposed to be clearly labeled. In this case, one doesn't even have to purchase the magazine to know what Time's position is. Not only is Israel's cause hopeless, but it is not even just. Even if the
article(s) within the pages were 100% even-handed, the cover puts the lie to that.

But we already know that American journalism died during the recent election.

Hamas and Their Charter

Do you really know who you are rallying for?


Those of you who so critical of Israel's attack on Hamas in Gaza should familiarize yourselves with Hamas, the organization that is the de facto government of Gaza. It is understandable that so many outside observers desire peace in the Middle East and decry the loss of civilian life that is occurring in Gaza (and Israel). However, if you do not understand the true nature of Hamas, you cannot make an informed decision on this burning issue.

Hamas, which means "Islamic Resistance Movement", came into being in the wake of the First Intifada of 1987, a series of riots and confrontations by Arabs in the territories occupied by Israel after the 1967 war. This group was founded by Islamic militants separate from the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Hamas has both a civilian wing, which engages in social works, and a military wing, that engages in acts of terrorism against the State of Israel, such as suicide bombings and other acts of violence designed to subvert the Oslo Accords It also includes the 2nd Intifada. In January 2006, Hamas won Palestinian elections over the Fatah, with whom they later entered into a coalition government and other elements in February 2007. In June of 2007, Hamas forces ousted Fatah from Gaza in a bloody war that established Hamas as the de facto government in Gaza (since Israel had evacuated Gaza in 2005). Since that time, Hamas has launched missiles across the border into Israel. A truce was brokered by Egypt in June, 2008. Hamas (not Israel) stated that the truce would last for 6 months. While the launching of rockets was reduced in that period, it was never completely stopped. In addition, Hamas used the period to smuggle weapons from Egypt through underground tunnels. In retaliation, Israel periodically closed the border crossings between Israel and Gaza. Then in December 2008, Hamas announced the end of the truce, and the rocket attacks across the border resumed full-scale using rockets that had been smuggled in though the tunnels during the so-called truce. That led to "Operation Cast Lead", by which Israel attacked Hamas targets in Gaza, at first by air and later by ground incursion.

That is where we stand today. All over the world, even in the US, mass demonstrations are taking place condemning Israel for going after Hamas in Gaza. Since the Gaza terrorists wear no uniforms, and hide their installations among the civilian population, they play on the international media and world-wide sentiment as they parade their victims-civilians whom they themselves have placed deliberately in the line of fire.

However, it is necessary for those people around the world who demonstrate against Israel to understand who Hamas is and what they stand for. Fortunately, there is documentary evidence-Hamas' own charter.

The charter of Hamas is readily available on the Internet. I would like to highlight the salient points. At the outset, it is crucial to note that by their own words, the conflict with Israel is clearly based on religion. In addition, the charter clearly denigrates any efforts at treaties or reconciliation by 3rd body entities. The goal, clearly stated, is the obliteration of the Jewish state for the sake of Allah. One should also note that they clearly link themselves with the Muslim Brotherhood, that entity that gave birth to modern radical Islam, yet today portrays itself as a peaceful and moderate organization. Thus, I have selected the most important articles of the charter. I repeat, the full charter is available on the Internet for those who suspect I have deliberately omitted exculpatory information.



The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas)

18 August 1988

In The Name Of The Most Merciful Allah

"Ye are the best nation that hath been raised up unto mankind: ye command that which is just, and ye forbid that which is unjust, and ye believe in Allah. And if they who have received the scriptures had believed, it had surely been the better for them: there are believers among them, but the greater part of them are transgressors. They shall not hurt you, unless with a slight hurt; and if they fight against you, they shall turn their backs to you, and they shall not be helped. They are smitten with vileness wheresoever they are found; unless they obtain security by entering into a treaty with Allah, and a treaty with men; and they draw on themselves indignation from Allah, and they are afflicted with poverty. This they suffer, because they disbelieved the signs of Allah, and slew the prophets unjustly; this, because they were rebellious, and transgressed." (Al-Imran - verses 109-111).

Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

"The Islamic world is on fire. Each of us should pour some water, no matter how little, to extinguish whatever one can without waiting for the others." (Sheikh Amjad al-Zahawi, of blessed memory).

In The Name Of The Most Merciful Allah

Introduction
Praise be unto Allah, to whom we resort for help, and whose forgiveness, guidance and support we seek; Allah bless the Prophet and grant him salvation, his companions and supporters, and to those who carried out his message and adopted his laws - everlasting prayers and salvation as long as the earth and heaven will last. Hereafter:

O People:
Out of the midst of troubles and the sea of suffering, out of the palpitations of faithful hearts and cleansed arms; out of the sense of duty, and in response to Allah's command, the call has gone out rallying people together and making them follow the ways of Allah, leading them to have determined will in order to fulfill their role in life, to overcome all obstacles, and surmount the difficulties on the way. Constant preparation has continued and so has the readiness to sacrifice life and all that is precious for the sake of Allah.

Thus it was that the nucleus (of the movement) was formed and started to pave its way through the tempestuous sea of hopes and expectations, of wishes and yearnings, of troubles and obstacles, of pain and challenges, both inside and outside.

When the idea was ripe, the seed grew and the plant struck root in the soil of reality, away from passing emotions, and hateful haste. The Islamic Resistance Movement emerged to carry out its role through striving for the sake of its Creator, its arms intertwined with those of all the fighters for the liberation of Palestine. The spirits of its fighters meet with the spirits of all the fighters who have sacrificed their lives on the soil of Palestine, ever since it was conquered by the companions of the Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, and until this day.

This Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), clarifies its picture, reveals its identity, outlines its stand, explains its aims, speaks about its hopes, and calls for its support, adoption and joining its ranks. Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised.

Thus we see them coming on the horizon "and you shall learn about it hereafter" "Allah hath written, Verily I will prevail, and my apostles: for Allah is strong and mighty." (The Dispute - verse 21).

"Say to them, This is my way: I invite you to Allah, by an evident demonstration; both I and he who followeth me; and, praise be unto Allah! I am not an idolator." (Joseph - verse 107).

Hamas (means) strength and bravery -(according to) Al-Mua'jam al-Wasit: c1.
Definition of the Movement

Ideological Starting-Points

Article One:

The Islamic Resistance Movement: The Movement's programme is Islam. From it, it draws its ideas, ways of thinking and understanding of the universe, life and man. It resorts to it for judgement in all its conduct, and it is inspired by it for guidance of its steps.

Note: Article 1 clearly outlines the religious foundation (Islam) of Hamas.


Article two:

The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times. It is characterized by its deep understanding, accurate comnprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam.


Article Seven:

As a result of the fact that those Muslims who adhere to the ways of the Islamic Resistance Movement spread all over the world, rally support for it and its stands, strive towards enhancing its struggle, the Movement is a universal one. It is well-equipped for that because of the clarity of its ideology, the nobility of its aim and the loftiness of its objectives.

On this basis, the Movement should be viewed and evaluated, and its role be recognised. He who denies its right, evades supporting it and turns a blind eye to facts, whether intentionally or unintentionally, would awaken to see that events have overtaken him and with no logic to justify his attitude. One should certainly learn from past examples.

The injustice of next-of-kin is harder to bear than the smite of the Indian sword.

"We have also sent down unto thee the book of the Koran with truth, confirming that scripture which was revealed before it; and preserving the same safe from corruption. Judge therefore between them according to that which Allah hath revealed; and follow not their desires, by swerving from the truth which hath come unto thee. Unto every of you have we given a law, and an open path; and if Allah had pleased, he had surely made you one people; but he hath thought it fit to give you different laws, that he might try you in that which he hath given you respectively. Therefore strive to excel each other in good works; unto Allah shall ye all return, and then will he declare unto you that concerning which ye have disagreed." (The Table, verse 48).

The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Muslim Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Muslim Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1968 and after.

Moreover, if the links have been distant from each other and if obstacles, placed by those who are the lackeys of Zionism in the way of the fighters obstructed the continuation of the struggle, the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).


Article Eleven:

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. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Muslim generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Muslim generations till Judgement Day?

This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Muslims have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Muslims consecrated these lands to Muslim generations till the Day of Judgement.

It happened like this: When the leaders of the Islamic armies conquered Syria and Iraq, they sent to the Caliph of the Muslims, Umar bin-el-Khatab, asking for his advice concerning the conquered land - whether they should divide it among the soldiers, or leave it for its owners, or what? After consultations and discussions between the Caliph of the Muslims, Omar bin-el-Khatab and companions of the Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, it was decided that the land should be left with its owners who could benefit by its fruit. As for the real ownership of the land and the land itself, it should be consecrated for Muslim generations till Judgement Day. Those who are on the land, are there only to benefit from its fruit. This Waqf remains as long as earth and heaven remain. Any procedure in contradiction to Islamic Sharia, where Palestine is concerned, is null and void.

"Verily, this is a certain truth. Wherefore praise the name of thy Lord, the great Allah." (The Inevitable - verse 95).

Note: It is not about land; rather, it is about religion.

Article Thirteen:

Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."

Now and then the call goes out for the convening of an international conference to look for ways of solving the (Palestinian) question. Some accept, others reject the idea, for this or other reason, with one stipulation or more for consent to convening the conference and participating in it. Knowing the parties constituting the conference, their past and present attitudes towards Muslim problems, the Islamic Resistance Movement does not consider these conferences capable of realising the demands, restoring the rights or doing justice to the oppressed. These conferences are only ways of setting the infidels in the land of the Muslims as arbitraters. When did the infidels do justice to the believers?

"But the Jews will not be pleased with thee, neither the Christians, until thou follow their religion; say, The direction of Allah is the true direction. And verily if thou follow their desires, after the knowledge which hath been given thee, thou shalt find no patron or protector against Allah." (The Cow - verse 120).

There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with. As in said in the honourable Hadith:

"The people of Syria are Allah's lash in His land. He wreaks His vengeance through them against whomsoever He wishes among His slaves It is unthinkable that those who are double-faced among them should prosper over the faithful. They will certainly die out of grief and desperation."

Note: So you still dream of a negotiated peace?


Article Fifteen:

The day that enemies usurp part of Muslim land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Muslim. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised. To do this requires the diffusion of Islamic consciousness among the masses, both on the regional, Arab and Islamic levels. It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters.

It is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses). It is important that basic changes be made in the school curriculum, to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah el-Din (Saladin). The Crusaders realised that it was impossible to defeat the Muslims without first having ideological invasion pave the way by upsetting their thoughts, disfiguring their heritage and violating their ideals. Only then could they invade with soldiers. This, in its turn, paved the way for the imperialistic invasion that made Allenby declare on entering Jerusalem: "Only now have the Crusades ended." General Guru stood at Salah el-Din's grave and said: "We have returned, O Salah el-Din." Imperialism has helped towards the strengthening of ideological invasion, deepening, and still does, its roots. All this has paved the way towards the loss of Palestine.

It is necessary to instill in the minds of the Muslim generations that the Palestinian problem is a religious problem, and should be dealt with on this basis. Palestine contains Islamic holy sites. In it there is al- Aqsa Mosque which is bound to the great Mosque in Mecca in an inseparable bond as long as heaven and earth speak of Isra` (Mohammed's midnight journey to the seven heavens) and Mi'raj (Mohammed's ascension to the seven heavens from Jerusalem).

"The bond of one day for the sake of Allah is better than the world and whatever there is on it. The place of one's whip in Paradise is far better than the world and whatever there is on it. A worshipper's going and coming in the service of Allah is better than the world and whatever there is on it." (As related by al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tarmdhi and Ibn Maja).

"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).


Article Twenty-Two:

For a long time, the enemies have been planning, skillfully and with precision, for the achievement of what they have attained. They took into consideration the causes affecting the current of events. They strived to amass great and substantive material wealth which they devoted to the realisation of their dream. With their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread corruption there.

You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.

"So often as they shall kindle a fire for war, Allah shall extinguish it; and they shall set their minds to act corruptly in the earth, but Allah loveth not the corrupt doers." (The Table - verse 64).

The imperialistic forces in the Capitalist West and Communist East, support the enemy with all their might, in money and in men. These forces take turns in doing that. The day Islam appears, the forces of infidelity would unite to challenge it, for the infidels are of one nation.

"O true believers, contract not an intimate friendship with any besides yourselves: they will not fail to corrupt you. They wish for that which may cause you to perish: their hatred hath already appeared from out of their mouths; but what their breasts conceal is yet more inveterate. We have already shown you signs of their ill will towards you, if ye understand." (The Family of Imran - verse 118).

It is not in vain that the verse is ended with Allah's words "if ye understand."


Article Twenty-Seven:

The Palestinian Liberation Organization is the closest to the heart of the Islamic Resistance Movement. It contains the father and the brother, the next of kin and the friend. The Muslim does not estrange himself from his father, brother, next of kin or friend. Our homeland is one, our situation is one, our fate is one and the enemy is a joint enemy to all of us.

Because of the situations surrounding the formation of the Organization, of the ideological confusion prevailing in the Arab world as a result of the ideological invasion under whose influence the Arab world has fallen since the defeat of the Crusaders and which was, and still is, intensified through orientalists, missionaries and imperialists, the Organization adopted the idea of the secular state. And that it how we view it.
Secularism completely contradicts religious ideology. Attitudes, conduct and decisions stem from ideologies.

That is why, with all our appreciation for The Palestinian Liberation Organization - and what it can develop into - and without belittling its role in the Arab-Israeli conflict, we are unable to exchange the present or future Islamic Palestine with the secular idea. The Islamic nature of Palestine is part of our religion and whoever takes his religion lightly is a loser.

"Who will be adverse to the religion of Abraham, but he whose mind is infatuated? (The Cow - verse 130).

The day The Palestinian Liberation Organization adopts Islam as its way of life, we will become its soldiers, and fuel for its fire that will burn the enemies.

Until such a day, and we pray to Allah that it will be soon, the Islamic Resistance Movement's stand towards the PLO is that of the son towards his father, the brother towards his brother, and the relative to relative, suffers his pain and supports him in confronting the enemies, wishing him to be wise and well-guided.

"Stand by your brother, for he who is brotherless is like the fighter who goes to battle without arms. One's cousin is the wing one flies with - could the bird fly without wings?"


Article Twenty-Eight:

The Zionist invasion is a vicious invasion. It does not refrain from resorting to all methods, using all evil and contemptible ways to achieve its end. It relies greatly in its infiltration and espionage operations on the secret organizations it gave rise to, such as the Freemasons, The Rotary and Lions clubs, and other sabotage groups. All these organizations, whether secret or open, work in the interest of Zionism and according to its instructions. They aim at undermining societies, destroying values, corrupting consciences, deteriorating character and annihilating Islam. It is behind the drug trade and alcoholism in all its kinds so as to facilitate its control and expansion.

Arab countries surrounding Israel are asked to open their borders before the fighters from among the Arab and Islamic nations so that they could consolidate their efforts with those of their Muslim brethren in Palestine.

As for the other Arab and Islamic countries, they are asked to facilitate the movement of the fighters from and to it, and this is the least thing they could do.

We should not forget to remind every Muslim that when the Jews conquered the Holy City in 1967, they stood on the threshold of the Aqsa Mosque and proclaimed that "Mohammed is dead, and his descendants are all women."

Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Muslim people. "May the cowards never sleep."

E. Nationalist and Religious Groupings, Institutions, Intellectuals, The Arab and Islamic World:

The Islamic Resistance Movement hopes that all these groupings will side with it in all spheres, would support it, adopt its stand and solidify its activities and moves, work towards rallying support for it so that the Islamic people will be a base and a stay for it, supplying it with strategic depth an all human material and informative spheres, in time and in place. This should be done through the convening of solidarity conferences, the issuing of explanatory bulletins, favourable articles and booklets, enlightening the masses regarding the Palestinian issue, clarifying what confronts it and the conspiracies woven around it. They should mobilize the Islamic nations, ideologically, educationally and culturally, so that these peoples would be equipped to perform their role in the decisive battle of liberation, just as they did when they vanquished the Crusaders and the Tatars and saved human civilization. Indeed, that is not difficult for Allah.

"Allah hath written, Verily I will prevail, and my apostles: for Allah is strong and mighty." (The Dispute - verse 21).


Article Thirty-One:

The Islamic Resistance Movement is a humanistic movement. It takes care of human rights and is guided by Islamic tolerance when dealing with the followers of other religions. It does not antagonize anyone of them except if it is antagonized by it or stands in its way to hamper its moves and waste its efforts.

Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam. Past and present history are the best witness to that.

It is the duty of the followers of other religions to stop disputing the sovereignty of Islam in this region, because the day these followers should take over there will be nothing but carnage, displacement and terror. Everyone of them is at variance with his fellow-religionists, not to speak about followers of other religionists. Past and present history are full of examples to prove this fact.

"They will not fight against you in a body, except in fenced towns, or from behind walls. Their strength in war among themselves is great: thou thinkest them to be united; but their hearts are divided. This, because they are people who do not understand." (The Emigration - verse 14).

Islam confers upon everyone his legitimate rights. Islam prevents the incursion on other people's rights. The Zionist Nazi activities against our people will not last for long. "For the state of injustice lasts but one day, while the state of justice lasts till Doomsday."

"As to those who have not borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings, Allah forbiddeth you not to deal kindly with them, and to behave justly towards them; for Allah loveth those who act justly." (The Tried - verse 8).


Article Thirty-Two:

World Zionism, together with imperialistic powers, try through a studied plan and an intelligent strategy to remove one Arab state after another from the circle of struggle against Zionism, in order to have it finally face the Palestinian people only. Egypt was, to a great extent, removed from the circle of the struggle, through the treacherous Camp David Agreement. They are trying to draw other Arab countries into similar agreements and to bring them outside the circle of struggle.

The Islamic Resistance Movement calls on Arab and Islamic nations to take up the line of serious and persevering action to prevent the success of this horrendous plan, to warn the people of the danger eminating from leaving the circle of struggle against Zionism. Today it is Palestine, tomorrow it will be one country or another. The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.

Leaving the circle of struggle with Zionism is high treason, and cursed be he who does that. "for whoso shall turn his back unto them on that day, unless he turneth aside to fight, or retreateth to another party of the faithful, shall draw on himself the indignation of Allah, and his abode shall be hell; an ill journey shall it be thither." (The Spoils - verse 16). There is no way out except by concentrating all powers and energies to face this Nazi, vicious Tatar invasion. The alternative is loss of one's country, the dispersion of citizens, the spread of vice on earth and the destruction of religious values. Let every person know that he is responsible before Allah, for "the doer of the slightest good deed is rewarded in like, and the does of the slightest evil deed is also rewarded in like."

The Islamic Resistance Movement consider itself to be the spearhead of the circle of struggle with world Zionism and a step on the road. The Movement adds its efforts to the efforts of all those who are active in the Palestinian arena. Arab and Islamic Peoples should augment by further steps on their part; Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should also do the same, since all of these are the best-equipped for the future role in the fight with the warmongering Jews.

"..and we have put enmity and hatred between them, until the day of resurrection. So often as they shall kindle a fire of war, Allah shall extinguish it; and they shall set their minds to act corruptly in the earth, but Allah loveth not the corrupt doers." (The Table - verse 64).


Article Thirty-Four:

Palestine is the navel of the globe and the crossroad of the continents. Since the dawn of history, it has been the target of expansionists. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, had himself pointed to this fact in the noble Hadith in which he called on his honourable companion, Ma'adh ben-Jabal, saying: O Ma'ath, Allah throw open before you, when I am gone, Syria, from Al-Arish to the Euphrates. Its men, women and slaves will stay firmly there till the Day of Judgement. Whoever of you should choose one of the Syrian shores, or the Holy Land, he will be in constant struggle till the Day of Judgement."

Expansionists have more than once put their eye on Palestine which they attacked with their armies to fulfill their designs on it. Thus it was that the Crusaders came with their armies, bringing with them their creed and carrying their Cross. They were able to defeat the Muslims for a while, but the Muslims were able to retrieve the land only when they stood under the wing of their religious banner, united their word, hallowed the name of Allah and surged out fighting under the leadership of Salah ed-Din al-Ayyubi. They fought for almost twenty years and at the end the Crusaders were defeated and Palestine was liberated.

"Say unto those who believe not, Ye shall be overcome, and thrown together into hell; an unhappy couch it shall be." (The Family of Imran - verse 12).

This is the only way to liberate Palestine. There is no doubt about the testimony of history. It is one of the laws of the universe and one of the rules of existence. Nothing can overcome iron except iron. Their false futile creed can only be defeated by the righteous Islamic creed. A creed could not be fought except by a creed, and in the last analysis, victory is for the just, for justice is certainly victorious.

"Our word hath formerly been given unto our servants the apostles; that they should certainly be assisted against the infidels, and that our armies should surely be the conquerors." (Those Who Rank Themselves - verses 171-172).


Article Thirty-Five:


The Islamic Resistance Movement views seriously the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah ed-Din al-Ayyubi and the rescuing of Palestine from their hands, as well as the defeat of the Tatars at Ein Galot, breaking their power at the hands of Qataz and Al-Dhaher Bivers and saving the Arab world from the Tatar onslaught which aimed at the destruction of every meaning of human civilization. The Movement draws lessons and examples from all this. The present Zionist onslaught has also been preceded by Crusading raids from the West and other Tatar raids from the East. Just as the Muslims faced those raids and planned fighting and defeating them, they should be able to confront the Zionist invasion and defeat it. This is indeed no problem for the Almighty Allah, provided that the intentions are pure, the determination is true and that Muslims have benefited from past experiences, rid themselves of the effects of ideological invasion and followed the customs of their ancestors.


Article Thirty-Six:


While paving its way, the Islamic Resistance Movement, emphasizes time and again to all the sons of our people, to the Arab and Islamic nations, that it does not seek personal fame, material gain, or social prominence. It does not aim to compete against any one from among our people, or take his place. Nothing of the sort at all. It will not act against any of the sons of Muslims or those who are peaceful towards it from among non-Muslims, be they here or anywhere else. It will only serve as a support for all groupings and organizations operating against the Zionist enemy and its lackeys.

The Islamic Resistance Movement adopts Islam as its way of life. Islam is its creed and religion. Whoever takes Islam as his way of life, be it an organization, a grouping, a country or any other body, the Islamic Resistance Movement considers itself as their soldiers and nothing more.

We ask Allah to show us the right course, to make us an example to others and to judge between us and our people with truth. "O Lord, do thou judge between us and our nation with truth; for thou art the best judge." (Al Araf - Verse 89).

The last of our prayers will be praise to Allah, the Master of the Universe.""


As I said above, if you think I deleted crucial articles that would contradict my case, please google the charter and reread the entire document. I chose selected articles for brevity and importance. The point here is that Hamas' agenda is not one based on land that rightfully belongs to others, rather it is about religion. It is about violent jihad. They are not interested in a negotiated settlement or a two state solution.

These are the fanatics that Israel is defending itself against. It is these fanatics that demonstrators all over the world including sadly, in our own country, are defending.

Harry Reid's Turn at the Beach

As predicted, Roland Burris can now start chiseling that new job of his (US Senator) on his mausoleum. Now that Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White has signed off on some document that certifies Burris as the designated senator, the Dems in the US Senate led by Harry Reid, realizing they don't have much legal footing, have declared victory and surrendered.

Here is a joint statement issued by Reid and Senator Dick Durbin:


"The secretary of the Senate has determined that the new credentials presented today on behalf of Mr. Burris now satisfy Senate Rules and validate his appointment to the vacant Illinois Senate seat. In addition, as we requested, Mr. Burris has provided sworn testimony before the Illinois House Committee on Impeachment regarding the circumstances of his appointment."

"As we had outlined to Mr. Burris, a path needed to be followed that respects the rules of the Senate," ....."We committed to Mr. Burris that once those requirements were satisfied, we would be able to proceed. We are pleased that everything is now in order, we congratulate Senator-designee Burris on his appointment and we look forward to working with him in the 111th Congress."

You see how Harry Reid takes the worst drubbing and calls it a victory-just like he did over that ridiculous letter he wrote to Rush Limbaugh's bosses that wound up on E-bay. So now Reid spins it like all of his rules and guidelines to be accepted have now been complied with, so Burris may take his seat.

What Reid has completely forgotten (conveniently) is his reaction when Rod Blogoyevich first made the appointment. Boss Reid made it perfectly clear that no one appointed by Blagoyevich under this cloud would be accepted into the august halls of the US Senate.

Nobody. End of discussion.

Of course, in the days that followed, Boss Reid started to realize that his legal standing was shaky at best. So now that Jesse White has affixed his name to some document that passes muster (maybe a baseball for all I know), Harry Reid, as he always does, declares victory.

Just like that letter he and Rush teamed up on to auction off for a good cause. The truth is, Harry Reid has once again been made to look like the boob that he is. Last week, it was Roland Burris that was humiliated. Now it is Harry Reid's turn.

Haj Amin al-Husseini-A Lesson From History

Husseini meets Hitler in Berlin, November 28, 1941



I have often raised the specter of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany in my postings, using them as a warning from history-specifically the folly of appeasing evil-as was done in Munich in 1938. Recently, I pointed out the fact that Mein Kampf, translated into Arabic, is still a top seller in the Middle East. Millions in that part of the world still regard Hitler as a hero and martyr. Why? Simple. He killed 6 million Jews. Today, you hear all the voices of those who are fighting the State of Israel insisting that they are not anti-Jewish-only anti-Zionist. This is a falsehood perpetrated to convince the world that the Palestinians are innocent victims of Israel and its policies. Today, there is an organization in the Middle East called the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in 1928 by Hassan al Banna, an anti-Semite. This organization actually gave birth to the radical Islamic movement. Today, they insist that they are moderate. They only want to bring democracy to Egypt, which is their historic base. They oppose the autocratic government of Hosni Mubarak. In actuality, they are still a radical organization, one that has given birth not only to the Muslim Student Associations in the US, but Hamas as well. One of their earliest leaders from the 1920s was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini. He was not only the most important Islamic leader of his time, but he was also a rabid anti-Semite and ally of Hitler.

Husseini was appointed Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921 by the British, who controlled the region after World War I. It was a disastrous choice, but made for what appeared to be political reasons. In reality, Husseini hated the British, and wanted them out of the Holy Land. He also hated Jews and fought relentlessly to keep them from migrating into the Holy Land. On countless occasions in his life, Husseini spurred his followers to go out and kill Jews.

He also did his part to put that idea into practice outside the Middle East. Eventually having to flee Jerusalem, he found his way to Nazi Germany, where he was given refuge by Hitler.


Husseini reviews Bosnian Muslim recruits to Waffen SS July 1943


Residing in Berlin during World War II, Husseini made numerous radio broadcasts back to the Middle East urging his followers to fight Jews. More importantly, during World War II, he was instrumental in helping form a Muslim division in Bosnia to fight on the German side. That division also participated in mass killings of Jews in that region. It is believed that Husseini actually visited Auschwitz and hoped that Germany would sweep through the Holy Land, where they would complete the "Final Solution".*

In summary, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a leader of the Muslim population in the Holy Land and an important early figure in the Muslim Brotherhood, was a war criminal.

After the war, Husseini made his way to France, where surprisingly, he was protected. Though charges against him were outstanding in Tito's post-war Yugoslavia, he was never extradited, and in the end, this monster was never prosecuted because the Allies did not want to set the Arab world against them (sound familiar?) He was able to return to the Middle East, where he continued his efforts to drive out Jews. Then came 1948 and the establishment of the State of Israel. Husseini was relentless in his calls for war and to drive the Jews from the Middle East. Beginning in 1947, he began his relationship as mentor to a young Yassir Arafat in his work to establish Fatah and eventually the PLO. What resulted was the beginning of modern Islamic terrorism.

Husseini died in Beirut in 1974. Yet, his legacy of hate and anti-Semitism, a mentality he did so much to further, is still alive today. I would urge the reader to learn more about Husseini and connect the dots between Husseini, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and yes, the Muslim Student Associations in America.

* Icon of Evil, Hitler's Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam, David Dalin and John Rothman. New York, Random House, 2008, pp 51-52.

Anti-Israel Rally in LA- Fousesquawk's Great Adventure

"Death to Fousesquawk!"


Today, I had the pleasure of hooking up with a few other conservative bloggers (Shane from Political Vindication, Eric from Tygrrrr Express, Doug from Political Pistachio Radio and a couple others whose names I don't recall because I am getting too old. What did we do? We charged off to the Federal Building in Westwood to show the colors for Israel in the big anti-Israel rally. It was the first time I had actually participated in a demonstration other than just watching and perhaps commenting. My son even put together a big poster on a stick that showed the Israeli flag for me to carry.

To say we were outnumbered would be an understatement. As we arrived at the federal building, we were met by a sea of Palestinian flags. All in all, there were about 20 pro-Israel folks versus 1-2,000 of the "bad guys". Who were the demonstrators? Overwhelmingly Middle Eastern folks of all ages. Many families brought their kids with them to get them a head start in their future lives of jihad and hate. As I stated, Palestinian flags were everywhere as were kaffiyas (those are the white scarves with the black doo-dads that Palestinians wear.) There was also one young gentleman who carried a Venezuelan flag (in honor of Hugo Chavez, perhaps) while wearing the kaffiya in a sign of solidarity with all of America's enemies.

Our sudden presence drew the immediate attention of the bad guys, the media and the LAPD. The cops (who did a great job today) immediately asked us to stay together in a group, and they directed us a few yards back down Wilshire Blvd. From that point, we had a constant escort of about 15 cops. We cooperated with them in every way. The cops were virtually everywhere, on foot, bike, motorcycle and horseback.

Anyway, a few Middle Eastern men who were old enough to know better, came forward as a couple of our people were being interviewed by the media. While one of our group was being interviewed three older Middle Eastern men stood and chanted loudly ("Palestine will be free"-or something like that) in an attempt to drown out our guy's words. A few minutes later, another Middle aged Middle Eastern man came up to the interviewer while he was interviewing one of our group and asked, "Why are you talking to him?"

(Because in our country, we have free speech, something that moron would not know about.)

I was interviewed by an Asian reporter who asked me in broken English about my "judgement" in coming to this demonstration. He also asked if I felt threatened. I told him that I was there as an American who supported Israel, and no, I didn't feel threatened because I would never let those people intimidate me in my own country. (Somewhat jingoistic answer, I realize. I know I'll hear from Lance and Bryan on that.)

So we stood in our designated spot on Wilshire Blvd with our flags, a line of police separating us from the angry mob who kept chanting, and chanting, and chanting at us.

Actually, these people spent the entire afternoon chanting slogans-something the far left has always done because they cannot engage in intelligent dialogue. That was certainly the case today. I would venture that the guys and gals with bullhorns were professional agitators, you know, the "Socialist Coalition Against the Suppression of the Oppresed Peoples of the World" or something like that. (The event was sponsored by ANSWER-LA and the Free Palestine Alliance-whoever they are.)

On one occasion, as a Middle Eastern family was passing us on the sidewalk, Eric (who is Jewish), asked a toddler in the family to shake his hand. The confused youngster gave his hand to Eric and shook it until his father pulled him away giving a dirty look to Eric.

"Do not shake the hand of that Jew!" (He didn't say that, but if you can read faces, it was obvious.)

Also part of the party were the motorists who were passing by on the street most of whom were circling the block so they could honk their horns some more. Many of them were Middle Eastern and waving flags out the window. Some gave us the finger as they passed, and we laughed at them. Some shouted obscenities. One middle-aged Middle Eastern man rolled down his window and shouted, "F--- you!", and we laughed at him. Other motorists waved the peace sign and others gave us thumbs up. I did not witness this myself, but a lady in our group reported that at some point in the day, a Middle Eastern motorist yelled, "Go Hitler!" out the window.

(He's already gone, meathead.)

Meanwhile, Shane from Political Vindication had wandered away from us before the police herded us together and had made his way alone to the speaking stage, where he listened to one vile Middle Eastern speaker talking about the American weapons we had given Israel, and that "We" would never stop fighting "until the last Jew is out of Palestine". A few of the demonstrators were puzzled by Shane's t-shirt that read something about an infidel, but no real problems. I'll let Shane explain that part on Political Vindication. There were also cries of "Intifada" (Uprising). Nice.

Shortly before the grand march down Wilshire Blvd and into Westwood Village began, one doof actually scaled a light pole and climbed to the overhanging part over the street to try and hang his flag. He was arrested when he came down, which caused the crowd to chant, "Let him go. Let him go." According to a news report a couple of objects were thrown at police (I did not witness this), but "calm" was restored.

As the march started, the LAPD gathered us on the north side of Wilshire and had to block a mob of bad guys who tried to approach us. They began chanting at us (or should I say continued chanting because I don't know when they ever stopped.) We were directed to walk about 100 yards ahead of the demonstrators, which we did. However, about half-way through Westwood Village, it was obvious that we had been effectively removed from the demonstration. Great police tactics, but as bloggers, we wanted not only to show our support for Israel, but also to observe the march and report.

So being the old DEA agent that I am (was), I decided it was time to melt into the general public. I turned over my poster with the Israeli flag to one of the others and with another blogger, we wandered into a souvenir store and then a restaurant until the police had escorted our group on. We then sat and watched and filmed (I tried to film with my cellular, but I am just learning-nothing came out.)

I walked along the sidewalk as the crowd proceeded back to the original spot at the federal building. Unable to continue on Wilshire Blvd, your fearless reporter then relied on his detailed knowledge of the area. (I grew up there.) I took a side street that led into the rear of the federal building and before I knew it, I was directly behind the police line as the crowd tried to get to the entrance and were blocked by the police. It appeared that I was the only civilian there aside from a few plainclothes cops who paid me no heed. Just as I arrived, one young mope had been arrested, so the mob again began chanting, "Let him go", "Let him go". "No justice-no peace". "No justice, no peace." About 50 cops formed a line, nightsticks in hand. It looked like the cops were going to get in some "stick time" as we used to say in the MPs. But some of the marchers calmed down their hotheads, and order was restored as the crowd backed up and began to drift off as a few speakers finsihed off the days festivities.

Kudos to the LAPD for doing their job well today and protecting us well. There was a total of three arrests (none of our guys, of course).

Tomorrow, the good guys have their day. There will be a pro-Israel rally at the federal building. I must say, however, that I wished more of them had turned out today.

On the other hand, being so few in number, we got so much attention.

Anti-Israel Protest January 6, 2009 at Israeli Consulate, Los Angeles

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpMbUliY3Ao


This tape is about 5 minutes long and shows protesters on both sides. The chants of both sides are also audible. What is important to hear is the final part of the tape, when anti-Israel protesters chant "Long live Hitler", "Hitler rest in peace", and a reference is made to Jews in the ovens-eerily similar to the chants heard from a young Muslim woman in Ft Lauderdale a few days ago at a similar rally.


Did you know that even today, Adolf Hitler is regarded as a hero by millions in the Middle East?

Did you know that Mein Kampf has been translated into Arabic and, along with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, is one of the top-selling books in the Middle East today? The latter was a forged document that purported to show a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world.

Did you know about the association between Adolf Hitler and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a virulent anti-Semite, who spent most of World War II in Berlin, made anti-Semitic radio broadcasts to the Middle East from Berlin urging Muslims to kill Jews, and who helped organize a 100,000 man Muslim army in Bosnia that helped murder Jews in that region during the Holocaust?

If you don't know about al-Husseini or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, I urge you to check them out. Google them. The former is one of the earliest members of the Muslim Brotherhood-the very organization that helped found Hamas. The latter was a forgery created in Czarist Russia that helped spark anti-Jewish feeling in the late 19th century. Though it was long ago proved a forgery, it still is accepted in the Middle East.

Watch the above tape. Research the above facts I have mentioned. Read the Qu'ran. Read the life of Mohammed. Don't take my words. Take their own words.

This is not about land. This is not about Gaza. This is not even about the innocent civilians who are suffering in Gaza in the cross-fire of a war. This is about religion.

This is about Jew-hatred. This is about Muslims who cannot tolerate a Jewish state-no matter how small it may be-in the Middle East.

So listen to the words of the anti-Israel protesters at the end of the tape-and you tell me who is on the right side.

More Change From Obama in His Cabinet

Hilda Solis


Tom Daschle

Two of Barack Obama's most recent cabinet nominees are Tom Daschle to head Health and Human Services and Hilda Solis to be Labor Secretary. Their nominations should not go by without comment.

Anybody who follows politics knows Tom Daschle, former Senator from South Dakota and one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress until he was voted out of office in 2004. If you think Tom left Washington and went back to South Dakota, think again. Daschle has stayed right there in Washington DC as.....a lobbyist! Actually, he calls it a "Special Policy Advisor" for the K Street firm of Alston and Bird (you are not supposed to go directly from Congress to being a lobbyist.)

Change (sarcastic).

One thing we know that will be on Tom's agenda at HHS is universal health care. He has already made it known that he favors it. He has also said that he would establish a Federal Health Board to overseeeeeeee......... everything.

Being a retired government employee, I can visualize it all now- a Federal Health Board with regional offices in 20 major cities overseeing dozens of district offices in their geographic areas. That, of course, will require regional directors, asst. regional directors, district directors, asst. district directors, and on and on it goes. Oh, I almost forgot; each of those offices will require EEO offices as well.

All that would certainly be change (not sarcastic). It will be change we cannot afford. But, hey! When did that ever stop a fast-spending liberal politician like Daschle?

Obama's choice to be Labor Secretary is Hilda Solis, a Congresswoman from El Monte, California. Where is El Monte, you ask? You don't want to know. Actually it is a community somewhere east of LA, which was made somewhat famous about 50 years ago when Rock and Roll DJ Art Laboe used to have record hops at El Monte Legion Stadium on Saturday nights. ("El Monte Legion Stadium Saturday Night! El Monte Legion Stadium Saturday night!") It was the place to go and be arrested.

Am I digressing?

If you need to know one thing about her (Hilda Solis, the lady I was talking about a couple of paragraphs above), she is very much pro-union, and even added in her acceptance statement that one of her goals is to make the unions stronger:


“I am humbled and honored to be nominated by President-elect Barack Obama to serve as Secretary of Labor.

“As a daughter of immigrants raised in La Puente, a community near East Los Angeles in the San Gabriel Valley, I learned from a young age the value of hard work, public service, and commitment to family.

“That is why I share President-elect Obama's belief in an America where if you work hard anything is possible.

“An America that values and rewards hard work. An America where we can both be standing on this stage today. But for too many Americans, that America is slipping further and further away.

“As Secretary of Labor, I will work to strengthen our unions and support every American in our nation's diverse workforce.
“I look forward to working with President-elect Obama to reinvest in workforce training, build effective pipelines to provide at-risk youth and underserved communities with sustainable skills, and support high-growth industries by training the workers they need.

“This includes promoting green collar jobs.

“These are jobs that will provide economic security for working families while securing our energy supply and combating climate change.

“We also must enforce federal labor laws and strengthen regulations to protect our nation's workers, such as wage and hour laws, and rules regarding overtime pay and pay discrimination.

“Through these and other efforts we can help strengthen one of America's greatest assets - its labor force.

“I want to take this opportunity to thank my family, especially my parents, Raul and Juana Solis, my husband, and my sisters and brothers for all of their support over the years.

“They have always believed in me, and have been my source of strength and teachers of the commitment to justice, equality and public service.

“To my extended family, those I have worked alongside with both in California and Washington, thank you for your commitment to public service and justice, and your loyalty.

“Quisiera tomar esta oportunidad para agradecerle al Presidente-electo Barack Obama por haberme nominado como Secretaria de del Departamento del Trabajo de los Estados Unidos.

“Como hija de inmigrantes, estoy muy honrada por esta oportunidad. También quisiera agradecerle a mi esposo, a mis padres, Raúl y Juana Solís y a mi familia, por todo su apoyo.

“I thank President-elect Obama and I look forward to serving as a member of his team.”

(Green-collar jobs? Thank God she didn't try to translate that into Spanish.)

One change I suppose we can anticipate with Solis in charge will the be the so-called "card check" system whereby union thugs can personally "ask" employees to sign the card with a yes vote. If fifty per cent plus one sign the card, the union is certified to represent the workers. This would supplant that out-dated and inefficient method hereto used called SECRET BALLOT. And who is not going to sign the card with Vinnie and Sluggo standing over you? The Democrats even have the chutzpah to name this bill something outrageous like the Employee Free Choice Act!!

Does all this sound like socialism, folks? If it does, it's because that is what it is.

Oh, yee suckers!

PS: In her confirmation hearings, the Republicans should ask Hilda if she ever went to El Monte Legion Stadium on Saturday night.

Your United Nations in Action

The killing fields in Cambodia






Genocide in Rwanda






17 UN resolutions against Saddam Hussein (weapons inspections-ignored)



Massacre in Congo



Tsunami in SE Asia



Darfur






Hamas launches rockets in S Israel




Israel responds and attacks Hamas in Gaza- UN Security Council demands immediate cease fire

Is the Media Ignoring the UC-Irvine Protest?

In reference to the posting I wrote last night on the UCI anti-Israel event yesterday, I have noted that this morning's Orange County Register is not reporting on it. A check of the LA Times online edition also indicate no coverage. How is that?

Why is it that the main newspaper of Orange County (The Register) and the LA Times (which has an Orange County edition) chose not to report on this rally held yesterday at UCI? Were they even there to witness it? I have to believe they were. I did see what appeared to be a news camera set up in the area, but I didn't bother to ask who they were.

This was advertised as a big event. Muslim/Arab students and their supporters had announced that they would gather to protest the Israeli military action in Gaza. Jewish groups were spreading the word asking for supporters to turn out to show the flag for Israel. Why was there no coverage in the papers?

I think I know the answer. Could it be that the Israel supporters greatly outnumbered the Hamas supporters? Could it be that the area around the campus flagpoles was a sea of pro-Israel posters and flags? Could it be that the pro-Hamas supporters were clearly demoralized-not only by the Israeli response to terror, but also by the fact that their protest rally had been turned upside down on them? Could it be that the media did not want their readers to see the pictures of a lady with a placard that read, "Proud Mom of an IDF soldier"?

The media, both international and our own, are eager to publish images that put Israel in a bad light. The allow Hamas to play them like a violin and show them the victims of the war in Gaza, while downplaying the Israelis who are subject to rocket fire from across the Israel/Gaza border.

They are not so eager, however, to show us the images of the young Muslim woman in Ft Lauderdale last week who was shouting to the Jews that they need to "go back to the ovens". They are not so eager to show us the placards saying "Nuke Israel" at the same event. We had to get that from the internet.

No, it appears that (surprise, surprise) our mainstream media prefers to pick and choose what they will report and what they will ignore. Yesterday, a group of Hamas-supporting students put on their usual bash-Israel event, were allowed to express themselves, and walked off sadly with their tails between their legs because the event had become the exact opposite of what they had wanted. It was turned into a strong public show of defense of a tiny civilized nation trying to defend itself against a bunch of barbaric terrorists.

Anti-Israel Protest at UC-Irvine

UC-Irvine aerial view. If you look closely, you can see the MSU/SAS students marching around Ring Road under surveillance of Israeli F-16s supplied by the American Empire.



Today, the Muslim Student Union (MSU) and Society of Arab Students (SAS)at UC-Irvine held an hour long rally on campus to demonstrate against the Israeli military action in Gaza. I am happy to report that there were no unfortunate incidents, nor was there any hate speech. At least I didn't hear any.

I am also happy to report that the local Jewish community turned out to show their support of Israel. There were plenty of Israeli flags handed out (yes, I carried one.) Pro-Israel posters were everywhere including one held by a lady that said, "Proud Mom of an IDF soldier". It was clear that on this occasion, the pro-Hamas people were outnumbered. Yet, we didn't not attempt to disrupt the program. We let the speakers have their say.

As they always do, the MSU opened up the program with a prayer in Arabic and a reading from the Koran. Two or three students who apparently had family in Gaza spoke about their perception of the situation. Thankfully, there were no Amir Abdel Malik Alis, Alim Musas or Mohammed al-Asis present to spout their venom.

Of course, it would not have been complete without the obligatory talk by a university professor. His full name escapes me and I don't know him, so I won't bother with a partial name. Suffice to say, his 15 minute talk was laughable. One would think that a teacher would have some sort of a lesson plan to work with-you know, introduction, body, conclusion. The gentleman began his rambling talk by describing a situation in the Holy Land in the 1940s where Arabs and Jews were working hand-in-hand. Then he made a reference to how it was "all swept away by the events of the 1948 war". Of course, he conveniently left out any mention of how in 1948 the whole Arab world declared war when Israel declared itself an independent state. (I guess he didn't want to bore us with details.)

But bore us he did as he rambled on to talk about imperialism and the "Big Empire", which as it turns out was that certain empire that supplies the F-16s that Israel uses to.........well, you get the message. You gotta hand it to the lefties on our university campuses; they can't talk very long about Israel without launching into an attack on the bad old USA.

At any rate, the good professor mercifully cut short his "speech" because he had a 12:30 class to teach, so he left to go bore his own class. (even the MSU students were left in a daze.)

After an hour, the MSU/SAS formed into a line, shouted something in Arabic and proceeded to march up and around Ring Road that circles around the campus. That's a long march, so nobody bothered to follow them.*

Thanks and kudos to members of the local Jewish community-many of them senior citizens who had been informed about the event and took the trouble to come and show their support for Israel.


* According to a post-comment by "Anonymous", apparently some pro-Israel marchers did, in fact, follow the MSU/SAS demonstrators around Ring Road. If that is true, then I stand corrected on a minor point. I am not aware that any incidents occurred.

Statement of a Recent UC-Irvine Grad

The below letter is written by my friend and colleague, Jonathan Constantine Movroydis, who is a recent grad from UCI and who has done a great deal to help document the hate speech carried out on campus by the Muslim Student Union and their speakers. More than once, he has been confronted by hot-tempered thugs of the MSU for filming their campus events. Of course, he has received nothing in the way of support from the school administration or campus police.

Jonathan currently works as an editor for Red County blog as well as the Nixon Foundation blog. Below is his story. (Tip of the hat to the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism)

"Dear Community Members,

I write this letter to you as a recent graduate, and concerned advocate of the direction of my alma mater. I came to UC Irvine in September 2006, believing I had just entered an institution of higher learning, but I came out understanding that the university faculty has absolutely no interest in fostering and protecting the free exchange of ideas.

I became deeply involved in the documentation of the pervasively intimidating and anti-Semitic environment at the UC Irvine. I reported on speakers and students who called for America and Israel to be wiped off the map, all while making racist depictions of Jews and praising terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.

By effectively standing up for my rights as a student journalist at an anti-Semitic speech sponsored by the Muslim Student Union's Amir Abdel Malik Ali in May 2007, I was able to help reverse the campus's restrictive videotaping policy, and through my continued documentation of these hostile events, I tried my best to make others aware of the problem of academic intimidation and the permissive acceptability of anti-Semitism on college campuses. Though, I have no regrets, these efforts were tedious, arduous, and took much of my time.

That May 2007 event is a prime and unveiled example of the Muslim Student Union's proclivity towards thuggish tactics and the administration's subsequent capitulation on the taxpayer's dime. Along with my brother, I brought a camera into Crystal Cove Auditorium and began videotaping a speech by Amir Abdel Malik Ali where he was explaining that the War on Terrorism is merely a conspiracy perpetrated by Jewish spies who wish to do harm against Muslims worldwide. As I captured footage, one of the MSU's members crept over my shoulder and demanded that I stop recording, or he will be forced to summon the police. Aware of our First Amendment rights, we refused the order. Then the Acting Dean of Judicial Affairs summoned me to the aisle, and along with two police officers we were escorted out of the auditorium and we're told that we could go back in if we stopped recording the event, as student groups were reserved the right to police their own events. The intimidation didn't stop in the lobby of the auditorium. Angry that I didn't empty the footage from my camcorder, I was followed to my next class, where members of the Muslim Student Union spotted my brother and I, and started taking photos of us.

In light of these events, and thanks to Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, this unwritten "courtesy" (as the Dean of Students Services described the policy) has since been overturned, and the campus police have stopped enforcing anti-free speech efforts. This doesn't mean that the police have stepped up and defended free speech and have certainly not stopped the problem of MSU members policing their own events. In May 2008, during the MSU's annual "Israel Apartheid Week," I (along with my brother) was told by the Dean of Student Services during an outdoors speech by Amir Abdel Malik Ali, that when recording the Muslim student activists, I would have to refrain from filming the females or "sisters" as she called them, on behalf of the brothers MSU. Aware that it was impossible for the police to enforce this very unconstitutional order, we kept filming. Ultimately, because of the lack of security on campus, two MSU members (one of which was allegedly involved in throwing a cinderblock at a government vehicle the previous year) decided to enforce their own form of vigilante justice, charging at my brother while using language that suggested that he wanted to cause physical harm ("you want to get jacked up?").


The UCI Campus police response to the incidence was unproffessinonal and appalling. Not only did they stand idle while my brother was attacked, but they refused to take statements from witnesses, instead discontinuing their investigation. Case closed.


That very same day, a black Christian minister, who can often be seen evangelizing a long ring road on the main part of campus, was pushed and shoved by MSU members. But Amir Abdel Malik Ali walked up from the flagpoles after his speech unharmed, and what was an apparent violation of campus code held a rally blocking ring road. He continued to rail against American and Israel, and his adorning crowd of students all screamed the battle cry: "Takbir Allah Akbar!" A victory for free speech?

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Constantine Movroydis"


Orange County Independent Task Force on anti-Semitism

http://octaskforce.wordpress.com/

Will Burris be Seated? Bet on it.

"Happy New Year to you too, Fousesquawk"


Yesterday, I poked a little fun at US Senator-designate Roland Burris for his rejection at the US Senate (Roland Burris at the Beach). Yet, I suspect in a few days, it will be Harry Reid who becomes the laughing stock.

Remember how Reid promptly came out and stated that Rod Blagoyevich's selection (Burris) would not be accepted by the Senate-that it was too tainted? Yesterday, Reid had his chance to really put his foot down as Burris was turned away at the door "because his papers were not properly signed off on by Illinois' Secretary of State, Jesse White (who up to now has refused to sign off).

Yet, it looks like the door is open and "Dingy Harry" is already laying out the possibility of compromise. Of course, Harry knows that in short order, the Illinois Supreme Court is likely to order White to certify the selection. Why? Because as smelly as it appears, unless Burris paid Blago something in return, it appears that the selection is entirely legal. (Strictly legit as they used to say.)

In addition, folks like Chicago Congressman Bobby Rush and the Congressional Black Caucus have already let Harry know they want Burris seated because...because...well, he's black. In addition, it has already been reported that before the Blago scandal broke, Harry had himself contacted the Governor with a specific request: Don't appoint Jesse Jackson Jr, Emil Jones or Danny Davis (all black). Instead, Harry suggested the selection go to Tammy Duckworth or Lisa Madigan (not black).

So, the question now begs: Is Harry Reid a racist? Well, no, and nobody is accusing him of being a racist. Yet, consider if Reid had been a Republican. Can you imagine the uproar that would have surrounded him? All the editorials in the New York Times, LA Times, Timbuktu Times? Calls for resignation. Calls for Reid to give up his position as Senate Majority Leader. Apologies. Trips of absolution to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. You know the routine.

But Reid is a Democrat, so no need to bother with all that.

So here is what will play out: The Illinois Supreme Court will order Jesse White to certify Burris' selection as US Senator for the Great State of Illinois, the Democrats will all tell Reid to give up the ghost, Harry will declare that all the legal niceties have been complied with (just as he had insisted all along), Burris will be admitted to the Senate, and Reid will declare a victory for the Rule of Procedure. (Does this remind you of the time when Reid tried to horn in on the credit for Rush Limbaugh auctioning off that letter from Dingy Harry to Limbaugh's boss?) Why of course it does. (Say yes.)

Here is one last prediction: When all this comes to pass, I will repost that Don Martin cartoon from yesterday with a new heading: "Dingy Harry" at the Beach.

Let's Play, "Name That House"!

(News item: Habitat for Humanity homes built by former President Jimmy Carter in Fairway Oaks (N Florida)in 17 days 8 years ago now falling apart.)



The above picture is:

a Straw house built by one of the three little pigs
b Straw-man argument used by my co-respondent, Lance
c One of those homes built in Florida by Jimmy Carter

About That Norwegian Doctor in Gaza

Dr Mads Gilbert



There has been a lot of press attention directed toward a certain Norwegian doctor named Mads Gilbert, who is presently in Gaza treating victims of the on-going war in a Gazan hospital. Dr Gilbert, who is part of the so-called Norwegian Aid Coalition, has been interviewed by the BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS to name a few. Of course, Dr Gilbert (who can be seen in the photo wearing a Palestinian kaffiya), is quite critical of Israel.

As part of Dr Gilbert's criticism of Israel, he states that to date, he has seen only one or two Hamas fighters who have been killed or injured. All the rest have been civilians. That is an interesting observation given the fact that Hamas doesn't have a uniform to wear. They are dressed in civilian clothes. Of course, that is part of their pattern of hiding behind civilians, making sure that their rocket launchers are situated in the midst of civilian locations like schools, residences and hospitals, and generally making sure that their own people take maximum casualties so that they (Hamas) can play the international press like a violin.

The fact is that the Israel IDF is taking more precautions to limit Gazan civilian casualties than is Hamas-a fact lost on the international media, which is singing the Hamas line.

What the media is also conveniently leaving out is the background of Dr Gilbert. The fact is that Dr Gilbert is a member of the Norwegian Rodt party (Red Party). In short, he is a communist.

Well, what's wrong with that you ask. Isn't the Cold War over? Are we still looking for a communists under every bed? Try this hat on for size: After 9-11, this good doctor cheered. he voiced support for this atrocity committed against the US. His comments were made to the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet.

But perhaps, the network you heard interviewing Dr Gilbert in Gaza didn't tell you that, so that you could know where this man was coming from.

This is what the media is doing, folks-on an international scale. During the American election, didn't we witness the same thing (our media openly taking sides)? Every day, Hamas is going to take the photographers to film the innocent victims that they (Hamas) are helping to create so that we can see them on the front page of every newspaper. They won't show you the innocent Israelis hurt or killed by Hamas rocket fire. As Dennis Prager pointed out on his radio show today, did you ever see a front page photo of any of the slaughtered victims in the Congo? Of course not.

The next time in the coming days that you see or hear Dr Gilbert being interviewed, check and see if the network mentions anything about his background.

Roland Burris at the Beach

(Tip of the hat to the great Don Martin)


Today, Roland Burris was denied entry to the US Senate.

A Plea to George Bush and Barack Obama-Speak Out Against Anti-Semitism

German synagogue 1938



Since I began my blog almost two years ago, I have written often about the topic of anti-Semitism, specifically, my worries that we might be seeing a resurgence of it around the world and even here in the US. With the situation in the Middle East, my fears are increasing. A week ago, right here in Irvine, two local synagogues were defaced with pro-Hamas posters. On December 30, in a pro-Hamas demonstration in Ft Lauderdale, some protesters carried banners that said, "Nuke Israel", while a few taunted Jews with cries of "you need bigger ovens." Add to this the increasing anti-Semitism in many European countries, and what we have is a dangerous situation that may even lead to a second Holocaust. It is high time for our outgoing President, George Bush and our in-coming president Barack Obama to publicly speak out on this issue.

I am exaggerating you say? What do you think will happen to the people in Israel if they are ever overrun by their Palestinian enemies? Of course, that would have to be aided and abetted by the Arab world at large (and, of course Iran with their emerging nuclear weapons), but don't discount the possibility. Who in 1920 would have thought that there would have been a Holocaust in the first place?

Naturally, the above scenario would also require the indifference of America and the Western world to the fate of Israel's Jews. But is that such a far-fetched idea? Clearly, the attitude in Europe is pro-Palestinian. Ironically, only Germany, with its unique history, feels any responsibility to Israel and the Jewish people. In addition, many in America are becoming weary of Israel's efforts to defend itself. Jews are being seen as blind supporters of Israel, though that is not universally the case.

So now, we have blatant expressions of anti-Semitism in Europe, where the small Jewish communities feel threatened and scorned. It should be pointed out that most expressions of hate seem to be coming from the Arab, North African, and other Muslim populations of those countries, but there seems to be no outrage coming from the native populations. And at home, the Israel/Palestinian problem is being exacerbated by increasing expressions of anti-Semitism.

Who are the perpetrators of these acts of hate directed against Jews here in America? In the case of the Irvine synagogues, we don't know. A couple of years back, there were violent rampages in San Francisco and Seattle carried out by lone perpetrators (Muslims) directed against Jews. The press, after the initial reports, quickly buried the stories because of their obvious implications.

On our college campuses we see the problem as well. It is not just the various Muslim Student Unions who are guilty, though I have repeatedly condemned the anti-Semitic speakers they have brought to the UC-Irvine campus. They are aided and abetted by radical, America/Israel-hating professors who actively stir up demonstrations directed against Israel. And make no mistake, these professors are not from the right; they are from the far-left, with few-if any exceptions. As pointed out in the essay I just cross-posted, which was written by Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, universities like the University of California at Santa Cruz are bastions of indoctrination aimed against Israel. Only Jewish students and young College Republicans will speak for Israel-at risk to their grades and their physical safety. What an environment for a young Jewish student to attend college in these days.

That leads to my final point, and I want to say it carefully because I am not looking to whip up feelings against our Muslim communities. I don't want to see violence and vandalism directed toward them or their mosques any more than against Jews. They, however, must understand that whatever feelings they have brought with them from their countries of origin, whether they be based on religion or the Israel situation, must be left at the door. We cannot tolerate a resurgence of anti-Semitism in this country that is even partially fueled by the feelings of immigrants.

True, we in the US are hardly at the point of a 1938 Kristallnacht pogrom, but the warning signs are here. It is time for us as Americans to nip it in the bud. It should start with our national leaders; hence my call for Bush and Obama to speak out in defense of our Jewish citizens. Obama can be especially effective because most of his support comes from the left-and yes, the black community in America is not immune from anti-Semitism either. Someone needs to effectively counter the words of the Louis Farrakhans, Cynthia McKinneys, and Amir Abdel Malik Alis. That would be Barack Obama.

Between George Bush and Barack Obama, they can influence not only their own contituencies, but send a message that even their respective opponents should accept and applaud. The time to do it is now.

Anti-Israel Bias Within the University of California

Below is the text of an article written by Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, a lecturer in Hebrew Studies at the University of California at Santa Cruz and co-founder of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (UCSC chapter). Her article was written for the Institute for Global Jewish Affairs. The topic of the article is the anti-Israel indoctrination which takes place within the University of California.

The article specifically deals with the Santa Cruz campus, which I might add, is possibly the most left-wing campus within the University of California system. There is a great deal of detail regarding the overall principle of free speech. What is of particular interest to me is the point that our university campuses are being used to indoctrinate rather than educate our students. I concur with that and would add that the focus on condemning Israel is just part of a larger leftist orientation. Eventually (as I have seen at UC-Irvine, where I teach), the anti-Israel rhetoric leads directly into anti-America rhetoric as well as anti-Jewish rhetoric.


Published January 2009 No. 77, 1 February 2009 / 7 Shevat 5769


Anti-Zionism and the Abuse of Academic Freedom:
A Case Study at the University of California, Santa Cruz
Tammi Rossman-Benjamin


"Since 2001, anti-Zionist discourse has found its way into classrooms and academic events at the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). At an academic conference held on that campus in 2007, the speakers claimed that Zionism was an illegitimate ideology and argued for the elimination of the Jewish state.
The unscholarly, political, and anti-Semitic nature of the conference raises questions about whether events of this kind are a legitimate exercise of academic freedom or an abuse of it.
Although the recently revised University of California rules do not specify the limits of academic freedom, they do presume that faculty and administrative agencies will define those limits and impose sanctions on faculty who violate them. However, despite a system of shared governance, in which faculty are responsible for ensuring the scholarly integrity of academic programming and administrators for making sure all programming accords with university regulation, abuses of academic freedom have been allowed to flourish at UCSC.
Members of the UCSC chapter of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East have documented numerous cases of faculty-generated anti-Zionist political advocacy and activism on that campus, and they have presented evidence of academic-freedom abuse to the faculty senate and administration for further investigation. These efforts have largely been unsuccessful, however, as neither governing body has been willing to address the problem, or even acknowledge that it exists.


Under the mantle of academic freedom, falsehoods and distortions about Zionism and Israel-claims, for example, that Zionism is racism, that Israel perpetrates genocide and ethnic cleansing, and that the Jewish state should be dismantled-are heard in classrooms and at departmentally-sponsored events on many university campuses. This essay will analyze the problematic nature of academic anti-Zionism,[1] the factors within the university that allow the problem to flourish, and the attempts of a small group of concerned faculty to address the problem within the university-governance structure. It will focus on one campus-the University of California, Santa Cruz-where the problem is particularly acute, and present an analysis of an academic conference on Zionism that took place there in March 2007.



Anti-Zionism at the University of California, Santa Cruz
Over the past several years, faculty members at the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC) have injected anti-Zionist rhetoric into their courses and departmentally-sponsored events.[2] For example, a community-studies class designed to train social activists was taught by an instructor who described herself in her online syllabus as an activist with the "campaign against the Apartheid Wall being built in Palestine,"[3] and whose recommended readings included such unreferenced statements as: "Israeli massacres are often accompanied by sexual assault, particularly of pregnant women as a symbolic way of uprooting the children from the mother, or the Palestinian from the land."[4]

The previous summer, the same lecturer taught a community-studies course on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which she used the class email list to encourage students to participate in a demonstration against Israel's "destructive actions" in Lebanon and Gaza outside the Israeli consulate in San Francisco.[5] UCSC students also report that some professors insert into class lectures anti-Israel or anti-Zionist materials unrelated to the course, as when a full class period in a course on women's health activism was devoted to a lecture on the allegedly ruthless treatment of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers.[6]

At the departmental level, since 2001 more than a dozen events dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have been sponsored by a number of UCSC departments and research centers, and all of these have been biased against Israel.[7]



"Alternative Histories Within and Beyond Zionism": An Academic Conference
Perhaps the most egregious expression of academically-legitimized anti-Zionism at UCSC was a conference entitled "Alternative Histories Within and Beyond Zionism," which took place on 15 March 2007 with the sponsorship of eight university departments and research units.[8] Four professors and a graduate student presented papers whose primary goals were the deconstruction, delegitimization, and elimination of Zionism and its realization in a Jewish state:[9]

David Theo Goldberg, director of the University of California Humanities Research Institute, delivered a paper on "Racial Palestinianization," in which he claimed that Israel has been from its inception a racist entity, which has used its racist state policies to protect the purity of the Jewish race and exclude and oppress the Palestinians. He further suggested that such a state does not deserve to exist and that, like the antiapartheid resistance in South Africa, suicide bombings are a legitimate means for bringing about Israel's justly deserved downfall.
Judith Butler, professor of rhetoric and comparative literature at UC Berkeley, presented a talk on "Hidden Histories of Post-Zionism," in which she revived the pre-state Zionist critiques of Jews such as Hannah Arendt and Martin Buber in order to argue that the Jewish state should be replaced by a binational secular state. She claimed that besides redressing the "longstanding issues of legal injustice and political violence" perpetrated by Israel, binationalism had the added advantage of being able "to subject nationalism to a deconstruction" and in this way defeat Zionism on the battlefield of ideas rather than through Israel's violent destruction.
Hilton Obenzinger, associate director for honors and advanced writing at the Stanford Writing Center, presented a personal account of his experiences as a Jewish anti-Zionist activist in a talk entitled "Jewish Opposition to the Occupation since 1967: A Personal and Public Journey." He portrayed Israel as an imperialist and colonial-settler state in partnership with the United States, and encouraged members of the audience to take responsibility for "ending this empire."
Terri Ginsberg, adjunct professor at Purchase College, delivered a paper on "Holocaust Film and Zionism: Exposing a Collaboration," arguing that Holocaust films have facilitated and justified the propagation of a racist Zionist ideology and its realization in a state that perpetrates ethnic cleansing and genocide against the Palestinians. She called on fellow members of the Left to confront the Holocaust-Zionist conspiracy head-on, in order to "transform radically the ideology and institutional structures of Zionism as we know it."
Ryvka Bar Zohar, a graduate student at New York University, presented a talk on "A History of Zionism and the Politics of Divestment," in which she argued that Zionism grew out of the attempt of East European Jews to recover from the "shame of the Diaspora" and the Holocaust by finding "pride in domination." She claimed that Zionism was a racist doctrine that led to the creation of an apartheid state, and she used her analysis to argue that the movement to divest from Israel was a justified and effective strategy for mounting an opposition to the Jewish state.
Although advertised as an academic event, the conference violated well-accepted norms of scholarship and university protocol. Most conspicuously, rather than providing a forum for the presentation of legitimate scholarly research in order to advance knowledge in the field and educate participants and audience, the conference was an exercise in political indoctrination, dominated by the promotion of an anti-Zionist agenda and directed toward the goal of encouraging activism against the Jewish state. Moreover, the speakers left little room for doubt about their partisanship: most identified themselves in the course of their talks as anti-Zionists, and two of them, Obenzinger and Ginsberg, openly expressed their solidarity with the Palestinian people.

In addition, most of the speakers were explicit about their political motivation and advocacy efforts. The talks by Obenzinger and Bar Zohar were wholly devoted to justifying and promoting their anti-Israel political efforts; and Ginsberg said her goal was "to transform Zionism in the better interest of social justice." It is hard to imagine that the conference organizer, who herself had publicly acknowledged her opposition to Zionism and Israel, was unaware of the fact that all of the speakers she had selected had previously identified themselves as anti-Zionists and were actively engaged in efforts to undermine the Jewish state.[10]

Given the highly politicized nature of the conference, it is not surprising that much of the discourse was tendentious and unscholarly. For example, numerous unsubstantiated claims about the illegitimacy of Zionism and Israel were made:

All of the speakers expressed the idea that Zionism is racist in its formulation and realization in a Jewish state.
Goldberg, Obenzinger, Ginsberg, and Bar Zohar claimed that Zionism was a brand of European colonialism and imperialism.
Bar Zohar called Israel "an apartheid regime," and Goldberg called Israel's actions "worse than apartheid."
Butler, Obenzinger, and Bar Zohar claimed that Zionism is discontinuous with Jewish historical experience and is therefore a historically and religiously illegitimate ideology.
In addition, some of the speakers made claims that were either untrue or gross misrepresentations of the facts:

Goldberg, Ginsberg, and Bar Zohar accused Israel of ethnic cleansing.
Goldberg and Ginsberg accused Israel of genocidal intentions and insinuated Israel's use of Nazi-like practice to achieve this end.
Butler, Obenzinger, Ginsberg, and Bar Zohar stated or implied that Zionists have engaged in a vicious, immoral campaign to silence all criticism of Israel.
Ginsberg claimed that Holocaust film scholar Alan Mintz "commits the shanda [disgrace] of dedicating his book to Baruch Goldstein, the right-wing Orthodox Jewish settler who, in 1994, murdered twenty-nine Palestinians in cold blood while they were praying in a Hebron mosque." In point of fact, the Baruch Goldstein to whom Mintz dedicated his book is not the same individual whom Ginsberg describes in her comments.[11]
Finally, much of the discourse at the conference was anti-Semitic according to the U.S. State Department, which has adopted a broad working definition of anti-Semitism that focuses on the commonalities of its contemporary manifestations, including the targeting of the state of Israel. Numerous statements made by the speakers, which challenged the legitimacy of the Jewish state or called for its elimination; which demonized Israel out of all proportion to reality; which compared Israel's treatment of the Palestinians to the Nazis' treatment of the Jews; and which accused Israel of exaggerating the Holocaust for immoral purposes, correspond to the following examples given in the State Department's 2008 report on contemporary global anti-Semitism:[12]

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination
Applying double standards by requiring of Israel a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust


Academic Freedom and Its Abuses
"I want to welcome everyone to what I consider to be a historic event on our campus. This is a conference-the Alternative Histories Within and Beyond Zionism-that I think exemplifies the highest ideals of academic freedom: the ability to debate and discuss and have dialogue on controversial issues. That, I think, is the highest ideal of academic freedom. So I'm very happy to see all of you participating in this historic event."

Lisa Rofel, conference organizer
In her brief introductory remarks, the conference organizer indicated that the presentations to follow were not only protected by academic freedom but were in fact exemplars of the highest ideals of that freedom. However, given the academically questionable, politically motivated, and anti-Semitic quality of the five presentations, these remarks beg the question: do the conference presentations constitute bona fide expressions of academic freedom, or are they rather abuses of it?

The academic-freedom rules that governed the University of California from 1934 until 2003 conceived of competent scholarship as a dispassionate duty hostile to attempts at ideological conversion: "Where it becomes necessary...to consider political, social, or sectarian movements, they are dissected and examined-not taught, and the conclusion left, with no tipping of the scales, to the logic of the facts." Also included in this older version of the rules is an assertion of university policy, by which the university "assumes the right to prevent exploitation of its prestige by unqualified persons or by those who would use it as a platform for propaganda."[13] Judged by the standards of competent scholarship and university policy set forth in this statement, the conference presentations analyzed above constitute clear abuses of academic freedom.

But things are far less clear when the conference is viewed through the lens of the current academic-freedom rules. These were revised by legal scholar Robert Post in 2003 at the request of the then UC president Richard Atkinson, following the failure of both faculty and administrators to apply the longstanding rules to a contentious UC Berkeley course, "The Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance," whose course description indicated that the instructor would engage in unabashedly pro-Palestinian polemics.[14] As a result of these revisions, all references to standards of competent scholarship that existed in the previous document, including the requirements of "dispassionate" scholarship, which eschews making ideological converts, and a concern with objectivity and "the logic of the facts," were removed. Similarly deleted was all language asserting university policy proscribing the use of the university as "a platform for propaganda."

Although the new statement acknowledges that academic freedom "requires that teaching and scholarship be assessed by reference to the professional standards that sustain the University's pursuit and achievement of knowledge," these standards are no longer spelled out in the rules. And while the new regulation mentions that "the exercise of academic freedom entails correlative duties of professional care when teaching, conducting research, or otherwise acting as a member of the faculty,"[15] the reader must refer to another document, the Faculty Code of Conduct (APM-015),[16] in order to determine what these duties are, as well as to deduce how they may serve to limit academic freedom.

However, by excising from the original rules those sections whose purpose was to define the limits of academic freedom with respect to competent scholarship and university policy, Post was not denying that academic freedom had limits, but only shifting the responsibility for defining those limits to other agencies within the university, namely, to faculty and administration. How, then, do these bodies monitor academic freedom and ensure that it is legitimately exercised and not abused?



The University's Two-Headed Monster
The governance of each campus of the University of California is shared between faculty and administration. For its part, the faculty directly controls all academic matters through its representative body, the Academic Senate, whose responsibilities include the authorization, approval, and supervision of all academic programming.[17] Often, as in the case of new-course approvals, academic programming is first vetted by faculty at the departmental level and then sent to an Academic Senate committee made up of faculty from across the university for final review and approval. Both reviewing bodies must determine whether a given course or program meets a variety of criteria, which in theory include "the norms and standards of the profession."

In practice, however, these norms and standards have been selectively or wholly ignored by both reviewing bodies. For example, even before the UC academic-freedom rules were emended in 2003 to exclude standards of scholarly competence, both the UC Berkeley English Department and the Academic Senate Committee on Courses of Instruction reviewed and approved the remedial writing course, "The Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance." Yet the course's egregiously tendentious, unscholarly, and anti-Israel course description included the contention that the "brutal Israeli military occupation of Palestine, an occupation that has been ongoing since 1948, has systematically displaced, killed, and maimed millions of Palestinian people," and it ended with the exhortation, "Conservative thinkers are encouraged to seek other sections."[18]

Moreover, although statements about standards of scholarly competence were removed from the revised academic-freedom rules, the UC-wide Committee on Academic Freedom, in a recent document entitled "Academic Freedom: Its Privilege and Responsibility within the University of California," warns: "Professors who fail to meet scholarly standards of competence or who abuse their position to indoctrinate students cannot claim the protection of academic freedom."[19] Nevertheless, as noted previously, courses in which faculty overtly promote anti-Zionist perspectives, and even encourage students to engage in activism against the Jewish state, exist at UCSC and on other UC campuses.

While the content of all academic programming falls within the purview of the Academic Senate, ensuring that its implementation meets the standards set by university policy is one of the responsibilities of the chancellor, chief administrative officer of a UC campus, though it may be delegated to a divisional dean.[20] Based on a statute in the California State Constitution, which provides that the University of California "shall be entirely independent of all political and sectarian influence,"[21] there are several university regulations that effectively limit the freedom of faculty to promote a personal or political agenda while implementing academic programming. These include:

Directive issued by Clark Kerr, president of the University of California, September 1961:[22] "University facilities and the name of the University must not be used in ways which will involve the University as an institution in the political...and other controversial issues of the day." (emphasis added)

The Policy on Course Content of the Regents of the University of California, approved 19 June 1970 and amended 22 September 2005:[23] "[The Regents] are responsible to see that the University remain aloof from politics and never function as an instrument for the advance of partisan interest. Misuse of the classroom by, for example, allowing it to be used for political indoctrination...constitutes misuse of the University as an institution." (emphasis added)

Directive issued by Charles J. Hitch, president of the University of California, 18 September 1970, "Restrictions on the Use of University Resources and Facilities for Political Activities":[24] "The name, insignia, seal, or address of the University or any of its offices or units...equipment, supplies, and services...shall not be used for or in connection with political purposes or activities." (emphasis added)

Academic Personnel Policy (APM) 015-Faculty Code of Conduct:[25] Types of unacceptable conduct: "Unauthorized use of University resources or facilities on a significant scale for personal, commercial, political, or religious purposes." (emphasis added)
Although the word political, which occurs in each of the above policies and directives, can be narrowly construed as limited to supporting or opposing candidates or propositions in elections, a consideration of the wording of the regulations and the context in which they were written suggests that their authors intended a much more expansive interpretation. President Kerr, for example, linked "political" with "other controversial issues of the day" in his 1961 directive. And both the Regents policy proscribing "political indoctrination" in the classroom and President Hitch's directive prohibiting the use of university resources and facilities for political activities were issued in 1970 in the wake of campus protests against the Vietnam War that spilled into the classroom and university-sponsored events.

In a letter that President Hitch wrote to all UC faculty just three weeks before the Regents issued their Policy on Course Content, he noted that faculty involvement with anti-Vietnam War activism had led many California legislators to "believe that the basic academic purposes of our campuses are being distorted and subverted, that academic credit is being given for work that is not appropriate, and that the atmosphere of the campuses has become politicized, with freedom for some views and not for others."[26] According to such an interpretation of "political," courses, academic conferences, and other departmentally-sponsored events that permit anti-Israel propagandizing are in clear violation of these university regulations, and yet these violations are routinely ignored by administrators.



Failure of Efforts to Address the Problem
In response to the rising incidence of anti-Zionism in classrooms and at departmentally-sponsored events at UCSC and on other UC campuses, a few concerned faculty, including this author, established a local chapter of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) in 2004. Since then, our group has sought to document the problem, to use our evidence to raise the awareness of the faculty, the administration, and the public, and to encourage each of these university stakeholders to address the problem with the means available to them.

Our earlier efforts within the university focused on influencing the highest levels of UC governance, both administrative and faculty. In September 2006, we presented an open letter with more than three thousand signatories to the UC Regents, asking them to address the growing problem of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism on UC campuses.[27] Although the Regents did not respond to us, in November 2006 we received a letter from then-UC president Robert Dynes recommending that we discuss our concerns with the then head of the UC Academic Senate, Professor John B. Oakley, and in early 2007 we met with him to discuss the problem and how the UC Academic Senate could address it.

We presented Professor Oakley with a report in which we documented numerous examples of faculty-sponsored anti-Zionism on several UC campuses. We argued that such faculty behavior violated UC policies, eroded the core academic values of the university, and created a hostile environment for Jewish and pro-Israel students, and we recommended that an independent Academic Senate taskforce be established for examining the problem.[28] Professor Oakley refused to have the UC Academic Senate consider our concerns, and instead suggested that we build our case on individual UC campuses.

Following Professor Oakley's suggestion, we decided to focus our efforts on one campus, UCSC, where we had documented the problem most extensively. Furthermore, in analyzing the unresponsiveness of both the UC systemwide administration and Academic Senate, we concluded that we would be most effective if we formulated our concerns more precisely, addressing academic matters to the UCSC Academic Senate and matters of university policy to the campus administration.

Our first opportunity to test our two-pronged strategy at UCSC came soon after, with the March 2007 anti-Zionist conference. A week before the conference, we began a correspondence with the UCSC chancellor, in which we argued that the event, sponsored by eight departments, was politically motivated and directed and therefore violated several UC policies proscribing university-sponsored political activities. Furthermore, we urged the chancellor to address these violations.[29] We did not hear from the chancellor directly, but in May received a letter from the UCSC counsel in which she contended that the conference did not violate any university policy, in part because it was not "political" according to her very narrow interpretation of that term, as limited to supporting or opposing political candidates or ballot measures. She concluded that the conference was a perfectly legitimate exercise of the faculty's academic freedom and should not be censured in any way.[30]

Despite subsequent letters and emails that we sent to the chancellor and counsel demonstrating that the UC presidents and Regents who authored the regulations prohibiting university-sponsored political activities intended the word political to be understood quite broadly,[31] and that even the California Supreme Court had determined that the term political included the espousal of any cause,[32] we received no further response from either office.

We had a similar experience with another administrator, the dean of social sciences, after we shared with him our concerns regarding a community-studies course that we believed violated both state law and university policy in promoting an anti-Israel political agenda and encouraging students to engage in political activity. The course in question, "Violence and Non-Violence in Social Change," was taught in summer 2007 and its course goals included training students to be nonviolent activists in "a current social conflict." Included in the course's online syllabus were the instructor's biography, indicating that she was an activist "with the nonviolent joint Palestinian-Israeli campaign against the Apartheid Wall being built in Palestine," and a reading list weighted with books and articles on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict written from an unambiguously anti-Israel perspective.[33]

Moreover, a student who had taken a previous community-studies class with the same instructor reported that she had used her classroom as a platform for politically biased and unscholarly instruction, and that she sought to indoctrinate students to her anti-Israel perspective, stifle dissenting opinions, and inappropriately encouraged students to engage in anti-Israel activism.[34] Before and during the more recent class, we sent letters to the chair of the Community Studies Department explaining why we believed there was a very good chance the instructor was using her classroom as a platform to indoctrinate students rather than educate them, and we requested that the department chair look into our concerns.[35] When the chair did not respond to our letters, we turned to the divisional dean, who, after consultation with the department chair and campus counsel, reported that no state laws or university policies had been violated.[36]

Addressing the faculty's responsibility for ensuring the integrity of all academic programming at the university, in May 2007 we submitted to the Senate Executive Committee (SEC) of the Academic Senate a letter documenting a pattern of political bias and advocacy-predominantly, though not exclusively, anti-Zionist-in classrooms and at departmentally-sponsored events since 2001. We argued that such bias and advocacy were antithetical to the academic mission of the university and urged the Academic Senate to investigate this problem.[37]

The SEC agreed to look into our inquiry and sent it to the Committee on Academic Freedom (CAF) for consideration. In May 2008, we received the CAF report[38] along with a letter indicating that the SEC fully endorsed it. Unfortunately, the report ignored our primary concern and instead twisted the committee's charge into an investigation of members of our faculty group for alleged violations of academic freedom. This is made clear in a letter sent by the chair of the CAF to eight UCSC professors soliciting reports on their negative interactions with members of our group, which was included as part of an appendix to the CAF report:[39]

Our committee does not plan to investigate incidents of this alleged bias, but seeks rather to determine if, connected to the complaint in any way, including the activities of those making the complaint, there is anything that threatens academic freedom on our campus.
Also included in the appendix are testimonies from four professors accusing members of our group of infringing on their academic freedom. Although the CAF report ultimately upholds "the right of SPME, on freedom of speech grounds, to make their opinions and viewpoints heard," it is apparent that including an investigation of our group in the report was intended to both discredit us and stifle further inquiry into this matter by members of our group or other faculty members.[40]



Conclusions
The foregoing analysis has amply demonstrated that anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic discourse has found academic legitimacy on at least one major university campus and is allowed to flourish because faculty and administrators are unwilling to address, or even acknowledge, these abuses of academic freedom. Needless to say, university students are the true victims of such discourse, whose one-sided, tendentious nature not only limits their access to vital information about complex topics of global importance but also violates their fundamental right to be educated and not indoctrinated. In addition, for many Jewish students, the academic legitimization of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism has helped to foment an atmosphere on campus, both inside and outside the classroom, that is intellectually, emotionally, and at times even physically threatening.

On some campuses, the situation has become intolerable. For example, the Orange County Taskforce, an independent body established to investigate anti-Semitism at UC Irvine (UCI), recently determined that "acts of anti-Semitism are real and well documented. Jewish students have been harassed. Hate speech has been unrelenting."[41] While much of the problem at UCI is linked to the Muslim Student Union (MSU) and the administration's unwillingness to condemn that group's anti-Semitic hate speech, the taskforce also implicates faculty "who use their classrooms as a forum for their anti-Israel agenda" in contributing to the hostile campus environment: "The anti-Israel bias on the part of many in the faculty provides a fertile environment for the MSU and its anti-Israel and anti-Semitic rhetoric and actions."[42]

Unfortunately, the situation on college campuses is not likely to improve until faculty and administrators acknowledge the seriousness of the problem and commit themselves to solving it. Given their intransigence until now, it is clear that new strategies need to be found to achieve this goal. In this regard, the Orange County Taskforce offers two promising ideas. Among the recommendations in the taskforce's report are the following:[43]

Students with a strong Jewish identity should consider enrolling elsewhere unless and until tangible changes are made.
The Jewish organizations and the Jewish benefactors should be aware that their continued support of an anti-Semitic campus is, in the end, counterproductive and works against their own interests.
Fear of losing their student and donor base, along with the stigma of being labeled an anti-Semitic campus, may be just the impetus faculty and administrators need to solve this alarming problem."



* * *

Notes


[1] For the purposes of this paper, "anti-Zionism" refers to an opposition to Zionism, understood either in its classic sense as a belief in the centrality of the land of Israel in Jewish historical and religious experience, or in its modern manifestation as a movement to reestablish a Jewish homeland in the historic land of Israel. Anti-Zionist criticism denies the legitimacy of the Jewish state's founding ideology and, by extension, the legitimacy of the Jewish state itself.

[2] Leila Beckwith, Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, and Ilan Benjamin, "Faculty Efforts to Combat Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israel Bias at the University of California-Santa Cruz," in Academics Against Israel and the Jews, ed. Manfred Gerstenfeld (Jerusalem: Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 2007), 122.

[3] Syllabus for Community Studies class "Violence and Non-Violence in Social Change," http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Israel%20Course_files/CMMU%20124%20Syllabus.pdf.

[4] Nadine Naber, "A Call for Consistency: Palestinian Resistance and Radical US Women of Color," in Color of Violence: The INCITE! Anthology, ed. INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2006), 75.

[5] See Appendix 1 in letter to UCSC Community Studies Department Chair, http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Israel%20Course_files/Letter%20to%20Prof.%20Pudup%206-18-7.pdf, 3-4.

[6] See Appendices 2 and 3 in letter to UCSC Senate Executive Committee, http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/UCSC%20Academic%20Senate_files/Report%20to%20SEC.pdf , 6-8.

[7] See Appendix 4 in ibid., 9-10.

[8] The following UCSC departments and research units sponsored the conference "Alternative Histories Within and Beyond Zionism": Feminist Studies, Anthropology, Community Studies, Sociology, Politics, History, Institute for Humanities Research, and the Center for Global, International and Regional Studies.

[9] All direct quotations from the conference presenters and organizer were taken from a transcription of a recording of the event.

[10] For example, Goldberg, Butler, and conference organizer Lisa Rofel all signed a University of California petition for Divestment from Israel, and Obenzinger has been part of divestment campaigns at Stanford and with the Presbyterian Church; Butler, Obenzinger, and Ginsberg all signed a petition for U.S. Jewish/Muslim Solidarity calling for cutting off all military and economic aid to Israel; Butler signed a petition boycotting Israeli academics and research; Ginsberg is a member of Jews Against the Occupation; and Bar Zohar helped organize "Israeli Apartheid Week" in New York City.

[11] In a personal communication, Mintz wrote: "The Baruch Goldstein to whom I dedicated my book was a rabbi and Hebrew school teacher who taught me in Worcester, MA, in the late fifties and early sixties; Rabbi Goldstein is now quite old. He is the first Holocaust survivor who told me his personal story."

[12] United States Department of State, "Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism: A Report Provided to the United States Congress," 2008, www.state.gov.documents/organization/102301.pdf.

[13] See: www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/assembly/jul2003/jul2003ii.pdf, Appendix A.

[14] See Martin Trow, "Reflections on Proposed Changes in the University Regulations Bearing on Academic Freedom in the University of California," NoIndoctrination.org, 24 July 2003, www.noindoctrination.org/uc_cas.shtml.

[15] See: www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/apm-010.pdf

[16] See: www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/manual/apm015.pdf.

[17] See: www.universityofcalifornia.edu/aboutuc/governance.html.

[18] Robert C. Post, "Academic Freedom and the ‘Intifada Curriculum,'" Academe Online, 89, May-June 2003.

[19] "Academic Freedom: Its Privilege and Responsibility Within the University of California" was presented by the University Committee of Academic Freedom to the UC Academic Council on 16 February 2007, and distributed to UC campus Academic Senate offices.

[20] See: www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/bylaws/so1006.html.

[21] Article IX, Section 9 of the California Constitution establishes the constitutional autonomy of the University of California.

[22] See: content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt900015wg&doc.view=frames&chunk.id=div00028&toc.id=0&brand=calisphere.

[23] www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/policies/6065.html.

[24] www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/policy/9-18-70.html.

[25] www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/apm-015.pdf.

[26] From a letter by UC president Charles J. Hitch to all UC faculty, discussing the actions taken by the California legislature to deny salary increases for UC faculty, dated 29 May 1970.

[27] SPME Open Letter to the Governor of California, University of California Board of

Regents, Board of Trustees of the California State Universities, Chancellors of the University of California, and the Presidents of the California State Universities: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Home_files/Open%20Letter%20to%20the%20Govern.pdf.

[28] Executive Summary of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East Presentation to John B. Oakley, Chair, Academic Senate, University of California, 29 January 2007: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Home_files/Executive%20Summary.pdf.

[29] Our first letter to the chancellor, dated 9 March 2007, was sent before the conference: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Zionism%20Conference_files/Letter%20to%20Chancellor%203-9-7.pdf. Our second letter, dated 20 March 2007, was sent the week after the conference and includes a report of the event: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Zionism%20Conference_files/letter%20to%20chancelor%203-20-7.pdf.

[30] Letter from UCSC counsel Carol Rossi, dated 30 April 2007, in response to our letters about the conference:

http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Zionism%20Conference_files/From%20UCSC%20General%20Counsel.pdf.

[31] Letter from SPME at UCSC to the chancellor, in response to the UCSC counsel's letter:

http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Zionism%20Conference_files/letter%20to%20Chancellor%205-11-7.pdf.

[32] Gay Law Students Assn. v. Pacific Tel. & Tel. Co., 595 P,2d 592, 610 (Cal. 1979).

[33] Beckwith, Rossman-Benjamin, and Benjamin, "Faculty Efforts."

[34] Naber, "Call for Consistency."

[35] Our first letter to the chair of the Community Studies Department regarding the course was sent on 18 June 2007, approximately one week before the course began: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Israel%20Course_files/Letter%20to%20Prof.%20Pudup%206-18-7.pdf. Our second letter to the chair was sent on 2 July 2007, a few weeks into the course: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Israel%20Course_files/letter%20to%20Prof.%20Pudup%207-2-7.pdf.

[36] Our letter to the dean of social sciences, dated 4 September 2007, in response to the course: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Israel%20Course_files/Dean%20Kamieniecki%209-4-7.pdf, and the dean's response: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/Anti-Israel%20Course_files/from%20Dean%20K.%209-21-7.pdf.

[37] Letter from SPME at UCSC to Senate Executive Committee of the UCSC Academic Senate, dated 20 May 2007, regarding a pattern of political bias and advocacy in academic programming: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/UCSC%20Academic%20Senate_files/Report%20to%20SEC.pdf.

[38] CAF report in response to SPME inquiry: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/UCSC%20Academic%20Senate_files/CAF%20report.pdf.

[39] Inquiry email from CAF chair to eight UCSC faculty regarding threats to academic freedom from SPME, and four faculty responses: http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/UCSC%20Academic%20Senate_files/emails%20to%20CAF%20re%20SPME.pdf.

[40] In a letter dated 29 May 2008, we expressed several points of dissatisfaction with both the CAF's report and the SEC's endorsement of it:

http://web.mac.com/spme_at_ucsc/iWeb/Site/UCSC%20Academic%20Senate_files/letQuentinSEC.pdf.

[41] Report of the Task Force on Anti-Semitism at the University of California, Irvine, 2008, 26: http://octaskforce.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/orange-county-task-force-report-on-anti-semitism-at-uci.pdf.

[42] Ibid, 26.

[43] Ibid, 27-28.

* * *

"Tammi Rossman-Benjamin is a lecturer in Hebrew at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and a Jewish educator who teaches widely in the local Jewish community. She is cofounder of the UCSC chapter of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East."

Leon Panetta to Head CIA- That's Change?

When I first heard that Barack Obama had selected Leon Panetta to head the CIA, my first reaction was that it must be a joke. Didn't they really mean Lou Piniella-another "Chicago insider"? Seriously though, this is just another case of a high level job going to another Washington/Clinton insider, experienced politically, respected on both sides of the fence, but with very little experience in the area of international security.

What can we expect the 70-year-old Panetta to do with the CIA, besides rein it in, make it kinder and gentler, and preside over another dismantling of our intelligence capability-just as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton did while in office?

Fortunately (perhaps) the CIA Director is no longer the top dog in the intelligence hierarchy. That position is held by the Director of National Intelligence, who, under Obama, will be retired Navy Admiral Dennis Blair.

Yet, it is hard to see the CIA becoming more capable and ready to protect this country under Panetta. perhaps, I will be proved wrong, and I hope I am.

Also perhaps, the steady selection of former Clinton hands will provide steadier leadership than had Obama brought in a bunch of wild academics and known leftists to run the country. It's all a guess at this point.

As for Panetta, however, it hardly represents change-for better or worse.

Famous "Disproportionate Responses" in History

Israeli Army invades Gaza 2009




Normandie Invasion 1944




Japanese surrender to Allies 1945




Charles Manson arrested




Liberation of Kuwait




Berlin defeated 1945

Ethics Training for Illinois State Employees

William Ayres
Distinguished Professor of Education
at University of Illinois at Chicago


It has been announced that 200 Illinois State Government employees will be attending an ethics seminar at the University of Illiois at Chicago this week. Speakers from Governor Rod Blogoyech's office will be participating. At first glance, this seems to be a good thing-ethics training for an entity that apparently is in dire need. Of course, I may have noted a smirk from some of you at the mention that some of the speakers will be from the Governor's office. It goes deeper than that, however.

I have never been in politics-and never will be. However, I have spent almost 30 years in law enforcement, and I can say with total honesty that I never took a dime that didn't belong to me. I don't need any lectures on ethics from anybody.

During my career in law enforcement, while 99% of the people I worked with were honest, there was an element of corruption-as there inevitably is. A handful of the agents I worked with in DEA's Los Angeles office went to prison for corruption. It has led me to look at this issue of corruption with a certain perspective, and I should add that corruption must be discussed within an American perspective because in many poorer countries, corruption plays a different role within that country's culture. (For example, when I worked in Thailand, there was quite a bit of corruption with the Thai police-in a nation where the average cop made about 30 dollars a month.) While not condoning it, we understood it and tried to work around the problem by identifying counterparts we could work with.

The point I am leading to is that in America, if you show me a corrupt cop, I will show you one that was (in 99% of the cases) dishonest when he or she was hired. I cannot say with certainty if that percentage would hold in politics. In law enforcement, however, I feel the blame lies in the hiring. You cannot teach ethics and honesty to an adult who is already corrupt and dishonest. Law enforcement hires are supposed to undergo an extensive background investigation. That is where you concentrate. For those who slip through, punishment against public corruption should be draconian (firing and prosecution).

Similarly, when I was teaching at Concordia University in Irvine a few years back, all teachers had to go through a mandatory sexual harassment training course. To me, it was an insult. The onus should be on the institution to hire quality people who are not so inclined. You can give them all the material with the rules and regulations you want, but if that person is so inclined, it is going to happen.

So back to the Illinois training program, which, if I am not mistaken, is already compulsory. Is this going to eliminate the problem? Hardly. More likely, it will just make the state look good-at least on paper. Until the state of Illinois cleans up its act, with help from a stern legal system, and uses more care in selecting its employees, the problem will continue.

Final point: Let it not be lost on us that the seminar is being held at the University of Illinois at Chicago. That is where ex-Weather Underground bomber William Ayres is a "Distinguished" professor of Education. When it comes to the issue of faulty hiring, is this not ironic to say the least?

Looks like a case of the pot teaching the kettle how not to be black.

The Women of Hamas

The Infantry- Palestinian women recruited by their men to be suicide bombers



The Navy- Yvonne "Haw Haw" Ridley (sailed on the Gazan ship "Dignity".)



The Navy -"Revered" politician Cynthia McKinney (lost at sea on the "Dignity")

More Change- Bill Richardson Withdraws

Bill Richardson- Can you find the Change?


In yet another example of the "Change" that Barack Obama is bringing to Washington, New Mexico Governor and Commerce Secretary-designate Bill Richardson has withdrawn his name from nomination, a move Obama accepted with the usual "regret".

The reason that Richardson is withdrawing? It is due to an on-going grand jury investigation into a "pay for play" arrangement (where have we heard that before?) whereby a California-based company, CDR Financial Products, received a huge contract with the New Mexico Finance Authority coupled with campaign contributions to two of Richardson's "organizations".

Change.

Richardson insists that he did nothing wrong and stated that he will remain governor of New Mexico "for now" (no change).

According to an NBC report, CDR reportedly made $1.48 million advising the New Mexico Finance Authority on interest-rate swaps and refinancing of funds connected to $1.6 billion in transportation bonds issued by the agency, which has been confirmed by state officials. Reportedly, the firm and its president, David Rubin contributed $100,000 to two Richardson organizations just prior to winning the contract. The Grand Jury is investigating whether Richardson put pressure on the state agency to give the contract to CDR.

Change we can believe in.

In addition, CDR's attorney, Richard Beckler, was questioned about the investigation by Washington Post reporters over the telephone on December 15 and made only this statement:

"CDR has always tried to abide by these byzantine campaign finance regulations and is cooperating fully with this investigation."

Byzantine? Change?

Oh, yee suckers.

Hamas Posters Placed on California Synagogues

Scene inside an American synagogue


Cross-posted from the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism
Tip of the hat to Ted Bleiweis

Hamas posters posted at U.S. synagogues

January 2, 2009

LOS ANGELES (JTA) — Police in California are investigating as hate crimes the posting of anti-Israel and pro-Hamas placards at two synagogues.

Three letter-sized, hand-written signs were discovered Tuesday at Beth Jacob, an Orthodox congregation in Irvine, Calif. One poster proclaimed, “Gaza– The New Shoah” and a second read, “Hamas Recognizes Israeli Genocide.”

Similar posters were found on the same day at the nearby Reform Congregation Shir Ha-Ma’alot.

Kevin O’Grady, Orange County regional director for the Anti-Defamation League, condemned the “targeting of temples to express anger toward Israeli action in Gaza.”

http://jta.org/news/article/2009/01/02/1001948/hamas-posters-posted-at-synagogues

Fousesquawk comment: Why is this not being reported by the mainstream media-as usual? Where are the voices of CAIR? Where are the voices of the Islamic Society of Orange County?

This is unacceptable. Not in our country. Not in America.

Yvonne (Haw-Haw) Ridley- Hamas' Useful Idiot in Britain

Yvonne Ridley


Not unexpectedly, one of Britain's foremost fools is speaking out on the Israel-Gaza crisis. That would be none other than Yvonne Ridley, former news corespondent, now a convert to Islam and tool of Iran and other radical Islamist forces. Ridley was captured by the Taliban while trying to enter Afghanistan to cover the US invasion after 9-11. A couple of years back at UC-Irvine, I listened to her presentation on the experience in which she portrayed her captors as a bunch of harmless comedians-never mentioning the executions of women in the soccer stadiums and "all that other stuff". All in all, I thought her presentation was pretty vanilla on that evening. Ridley is vitriolic when it comes to the subject of Israel, however, and various videos are out there on the Internet in which she harangues crowds of radical Muslims in the UK against Israel. She is also noted for telling British Muslims not to cooperate with the police.

Now, in the face of the current conflict, Ridley, a former passenger of the good ship "Dignity", which delivers all kinds of goodies to Gaza and was intercepted by the Israeli Navy a few days ago, has chosen to weigh in on that incident. Her statements appear on Ikhwan-the English-language website of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is entitled; "Pirates of the Mediterranean". You can read it below:

http://www.ikhwanweb.com/Article.asp?ID=18965&SectionID=0

Especially hilarious are her references to Cynthia McKinney, whom she referred to as a "revered politician" and a "woman of substance". (I'll say though Yvonne and I may diasgree on what substance.)

"It is also worth pointing out that Dignity was clearly flying the flag of Gibraltar, and was piloted by an English captain with a passenger list including revered politician Cynthia McKinney from the US. The Israeli Government Press Office director was faxed the entire passenger list and press release shortly after Dignity set sail. Cynthia is a former Congresswoman from Georgia, and the 2008 Green Party US presidential candidate. She was traveling to Gaza to assess the ongoing conflict."

I would not even attempt to analyze why Ridley, after her experience with the Taliban, felt inspired not only to convert to Islam (which is her right), but to embrace its more radical elements in the UK. She attempted to explain it that evening she appeared at UCI, but it was lost on me.

I do know that this is a dangerously misguided individual who will probably spend the rest of her life following the path of militant Islam. Maybe someday, she will go down in British history as a latter day "Lord Haw Haw" (William Joyce), the British follower of Nazism who made enemy broadcasts from Germany to England during World War II. I suppose she has not yet crossed that line under British law. At the least, however, she should be characterized as a useful idiot.

Pro-Hamas Demonstration in Ft Lauderdale

This is a video taken by Mr Tom Trento on December 30th in Ft Lauderdale, Florida. Take note of the chants of some of the pro-Hamas demonstrators-some 200-300 as they scream across the street at some 50 pro-Israel supporters. (I have downloaded it from Red County blog.)

"Go to Hell"
"Go back to the oven"
"You need bigger ovens"

In addition, there were placards reading, "Nuke Israel".

Why has this not received the attention of the mainstream media and been reported all over the country? Why is it that we have to depend on bloggers and private citizens to put up on the Internet what the msm prefers to bury?

Where is CAIR, and why are they not chastizing those in the crowd who yelled such shocking things at our Jewish citizens?

Israel- The New Czechoslovakia

In the wake of Israel's bombardment of Gaza, massive protests have broken out not only in the Middle East, but across Europe as well. Of course, there were no prior protests against the rockets being launched from Gaza into civilian areas of Israel, but that was to be expected. A large part of the protesters are Arab and Muslim immigrants to the European nations. Why is it that we don't see any protests in favor of Israel taking place in Europe? The answers are fairly obvious.

First of all, as I have pointed out previously, the European nations are afraid. They are afraid of their large Muslim populations, which have shown themselves to be nothing if not volatile. Witness the UK, Netherlands, France, Denmark, etc. Secondly, the Europeans are keenly aware that their overseas citizens, missions and interests are subject to attack by terrorists.

Finally, the Europeans are afraid of having all that Middle East oil cut off.

And what do the Europeans have to fear from Israel, Jews in general or their own Jewish citizens in particular?

Nothing. No riots, no terrorist attacks, no oil cutoffs. In fact, these countries don't even have much of a Jewish population to begin with. Remember the Holocaust? That pretty much eliminated that consideration. In fact, what Jewish populations they do have are pretty much hunkered down rather than try to counterbalance the anti-Israel mobs with their own demonstrations as we can still do in the US.

A Spanish writer, whose name escapes me, recently wrote an article that appeared on the Internet. He bemoaned the fact that his country, like so many others in Europe, had over time pretty much eliminated its Jewish population, which had contributed so much in the sciences, arts and culture and replaced it with a population that was contributing nothing but unrest, hatred and violence. I have to agree. Europe has pretty much made its bed over the past couple of generations. Now they have to lie down in it. As a result, what we see are massive, sometimes violent protests on the streets of European cities all aimed against tiny Israel. Europeans always wring their hands and call for immediate cease fires as soon as Israel defends itself against the murderous forces of Hamas and Hizbollah. It has nothing to do with right or wrong or morality. It has everything to do with that trait that Europeans are famous for-practicality. To Europe, Israel is the "inconvenient country" and Jews in general are the "inconvenient people". How dare they defend themselves against those noble Palestinians (who really are victims of themselves, their leaders and surrounding Arab nations)?

In reality, the Europeans are prisoners of their own demographics, which, if the present trend continues, will make that continent majority Muslim in two generations. When that happens, Europe will be what it was in 1940; a continent of hate-and once again, a place where Jews are not safe-as if they are safe now.

It saddens me to say these things about Europe, a place with which I am intimately familiar and a place which I love. It has to be said, however. A new wave of Nazism is growing in Europe. It is called militant-Islam. The question is how will the Europeans deal with it? Up to now, they are dealing with it the same way Britain and France dealt with it in 1938 at Munich when they threw Czechoslovakia to the wolves of Nazi Germany.

Today, Israel is the new Czechoslovakia.

Meanwhile in Teheran....

Iranian "protesters" doing what they do best. This time storming a British Embassy compound in Teheran December 30th to protest the Israeli attack on Gaza.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5423591.ece

The CAIR Petition

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper


Today, I visited the website of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). There is the usual drivel about how Muslims in America are being discriminated against. Of course, there is an article announcing that they have filed a complaint with the Dept. of Transportation over the Muslim family that was taken off a flight over statements they were overheard making on board that passengers reported to the airline.

As for the conflict in the Middle East, CAIR is announcing a petition drive aiming for a million signatures. Here is the petition statement:


"We, the undersigned people of conscience who respect international law and the sanctity of human life, urge you to speak out for peace and justice for all parties in the Middle East crisis.

“We are concerned that the current violence and ongoing humanitarian crisis is further eroding America's international image. For this reason, a strong, balanced stance from you that is aimed at fostering an enduring peace is vital.

“Unfortunately, all parties in the Middle East conflict have committed violence against civilians. We unequivocally condemn all of these actions.

“The European Union (EU), Russia, the UN Secretary-General, the Arab League, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), and other international bodies are all urging Israel to end it (sic) attacks.

“Middle East Envoy Tony Blair deplored the "tragic of loss of life," while French President Nicolas Sarkozy condemned Israel's "disproportionate use of force."

“EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said the Israeli attacks were "inflicting an unacceptable toll on Palestinian civilians and will only worsen the humanitarian crisis as well as complicate the search for a peaceful solution."

“Unfortunately, our nation's one-sided response to this tragic episode will only serve to fuel anti-American sentiments in the Muslim world and beyond.

“We therefore call on you to demonstrate your commitment to changing our nation's current one-sided Mideast policy by speaking out now in favor of peace and justice for all parties to this decades-long conflict.”


Sounds good, right? Peace and justice for all in the current conflict. Who could argue with that? Yet, just as CAIR reacted in the Mumbai incident, in a carefully-crafted statement, they refuse to even acknowledge the rockets that Hamas rained down on Israel. Notice the sentences above that single out Israel for condemnation. In all, there are three references to Israel and its "objectionable" acts, but nowhere does the word "Hamas" appear. Nowhere is there any mention of rocket attacks hitting civilian targets. Nowhere does Hamas mention the fact that Hamas has deliberately set up its operation centers, rocket launchers and ammunition stockpiles in the middle of civilian sites such as schools, residences and hospitals.

It is all about "stopping Israel", not stopping Hamas. Why is this? Is it because, as always, CAIR will take the Muslim side? Is it because CAIR is allied with Hamas-as has been often charged?

And why is this conflict eroding America's image? Is it because President George Bush is putting the blame squarely where it belongs-on Hamas? Is it because we are not rushing to impose a cease-fire that will restrain Israel while Hamas resumes its rocket attacks.

To tell you the truth, if America sits back and lets Israel obliterate Hamas, I don't care if this "erodes our image" with the Arab/Muslim world, Europe or anywhere else.

Those phony "moderates" at CAIR need to wake up to a simple fact. America and the majority of the American people are sympathetic to Israel. Most of us detest and mock terrorists who target the innocent because they cannot stand and defeat Israel army to army-even though they have a huge population advantage.

These people at CAIR take great pains to depict themselves as "moderates". In actuality, they are propagandists and apologists for international terrorism.

Fousesquawk Stands With Israel

Fousesquawk stands with the nation of Israel in its fight to defend itself.
Fousesquawk condemns the actions of Hamas in sending rockets into Israel.
Fousesquawk stands with the Jewish people against those who use the issue of Israel to revive and spread anti-Semitism in the West.

It's that simple.

New Years Eve in New York

And shame on you too.





With all due respect to New York City, that is the last place on earth that I would spend New Years Eve. Maybe it's my California blood, but the thought of standing in Times Square with a million people freezing my butt off and waiting for some ball to be dragged down to the street just doesn't do it for me. Nor do I get any enjoyment from watching it all "unfold" on TV.

I recall a couple of years back seeing Dick Clark (probably in a Hollywood studio) "MC"-ing the festivities and switching to the unlucky reporters on the freezing street below.

"Hi, where are YOU from?"

"Bullsnuts, Oklahoma, and I wanna say hi...."

Then Dick would introduce a "live" performance by Aero-Smith or some other rock group, which was actually an old video-tape of one of their concerts. Great. The least he could have done was show an old tape of Little Richard. Now that I would have enjoyed.

This New Years Eve, we were on our way to a party, and while I was waiting for the missus to get ready, it was 5 minutes to midnight in New York. So there I was watching the ever-inane Anderson Vanderbilt Cooper with some foul-mouthed comedienne named Kathy Griffin (I had never heard of her). Cooper, who is lost without a tele-prompter in front of him, was trying to fill in the last few minutes while Griffin was going off on some profane tirade.

And there, waiting to pull the switch or whatever it is that makes that stupid ball come down were none other than Mr and Mrs Corruption themselves-Bill and Hillary Clinton. Bill was standing there with that famous ---- eating grin on his face while the Duchess was doing what she always does in public. She was standing there clapping her hands with that Spade Cooley* look on her face.

(* Spade Cooley was a country and western music show MC back in the 50s in LA, who played the fiddle, stomped his feet and had a wild Hillary Clinton look on his face. He would always sign off his shows by telling viewers that if they didn't tune in next week, "Shame, shame on you". He eventually did life in prison for murdering his wife. Shame on him.)

Then, as the Magic Moment arrived, loudspeakers starting playing the old traditional tunes by Guy Lombardo and his Dead Canadians and Frank Sinatra doing, "New York, New York". The only thing missing was Lawrence Welk proclaiming, "Ah horrible-ah horrible ah".

I later heard that sometime after midnight, Ms Griffin started exchanging words with a heckler and put out some X-rated comments about something the guy had in his mouth. Shame on you, CNN ("The Most Trusted Name in News").

Next year, I think I'll watch MSNBC and see how Keith Olbermann handles it. With no more Bush to bash, MSNBC needs to give this guy something to do. His partner will probably be Rachel Maddow, and they will probably spend the entire evening talking about how great it is that George Bush isn't around any more.

Happy New Year, everybody. And all you folks in Times Square-please get in out of the cold.

Let's Play, "Name That Hand"!

Who does this hand belong to?

a President Barack Obama walking on water
b Leonardo Di Caprio in "Titanic"
c Cynthia McKinney on the "Dignity"
d Wall Street taking a bath
e All of the above

Israel Takes Out Hamas Leader

Israeli school in Beershiva hit by Hamas rocket attack, December 31, 2008



The death of Hamas leader Nizar Rayan is good news even if tempered with the fact that members of his family were killed with him including two of his four wives and four of his six children. Yet, that fact should not be used as a propaganda tool by the Hamas terrorists.

The fact is that Rayan knew he was a target of Israeli bombs, yet refused to leave his residence, which he knew would likely be hit. It was his wish to become a martyr, and become a martyr he did. Apparently, he also made that decision for his family as well. He could have moved them to safety-as as any rational man would have done- but he chose to expose the rest of his family to "martyrdom" as well.

This incident is just another example of the sick ideology that has permeated the Palestinians, where mothers raise their children to become suicide bombers to be recruited by the Rayans and others. (Rayan was considered among other things, a "mentor" to suicide bombers in addition to being a lecturer on Islamic law at a university in Gaza.) This is what Rayan was teaching to Palestinian youth.

One would think that the people in Gaza would want to be known by the outside world for more positive accomplishments than suicide, homicide, bombs, death and destruction. How about building something? How about discovering something? How about curing a disease?

Why is it that since the Israelis pulled out of Gaza in August 2005, forcing unwilling Jewish settlers out by force in the process, that the leadership in Gaza could not use that opportunity to build a constructive society? Instead, they chose to rain rockets into Israel until it could no longer be tolerated by the Israelis (Of course, it was tolerated by the outside world, the EU and the UN.) And, as is their custom, Hamas, like Hizbollah, uses civilians in residences, mosques and schools as their human shields, quick to bring in the world's media to show the "innocent victims of Israeli's military" when non-combatants are inevitably killed. Israel uses every precaution available to avoid the taking of innocent life even at increasing the risk to its soldiers. In contrast, the killers of Hamas and Hizbollah deliberately target innocent civilians, the elderly, women and children. Yet the outside world looks the other way and only raises objections when Israel fights back. We even read of demonstrations against Israel in India, where the lessons of Mumbai have apparently already been forgotten.

Oh, those "inconvenient Jews", the Israelis. If only Israel would go away, we could live in peace with the Muslim world, not fear terrorist attacks against ourselves and have all the Middle East oil we need. Of course, we may have to take away our freedoms, change our religion and cover up our women to keep the Muslim world happy, but that would be a small price to pay now, wouldn't it?

Peace in our time, if you will.

No, I say good riddance with the Nizar Rayans of the world. I say let Israel finish the job of wiping out Hamas. Their enemies are our enemies.

The Bangkok Fire

The news about the Santika Bangkok nightclub fire that killed dozens New Years Eve is terrible, but not surprising. Assuming that it was an accident, it will likely be shown that the cause was a lack of safety standards in the building that was facilitated by a bribe or two. According to the news reports, that is already under investigation by Thai authorities.

In 1975, when my wife and I arrived in Bangkok to begin a three year stint at the American Embassy, we stayed for a few weeks at the New Imperial Hotel around the corner. It was called the New Imperial Hotel because the previous Imperial Hotel had burned down a couple of years previous with great loss of life. The story was still fresh that as the fire raged, hotel owners were having to negotiate a price with the firemen to put out the flames.

A few years later, after we had left Bangkok, the infamous Grace Hotel on Soi Nana burned down again with great loss of life. The hotel had been a notorious pick up place for Thai hookers and their foreign customers.

In a country like Thailand, where corruption is so endemic, safety standards in buildings and roads are often ignored as money passes hands between builders and inspectors. The result has been world-class potholes and tragically, buildings with high occupancy that burn easily. What happened New Years Eve is sometimes the result.

Not having been back to Thailand since 1982, I would have hoped that things had changed since those days. It seems, however, that is not the case.