8 posts tagged “anti-semitism”
The Mainstream Media (MSM) is all in a blather (and so also Barack Hussein Obama) over a comment manipulated by the MSM of John McCain.
If you have not heard, the MSM is painting a picture that McCain said Hamas endorses Obama for President. Obama has tried to exploit this sound byte by being outraged that his Campaign receives the endorsement of the Murdering Muslim terrorist organization known as Hamas.
The reality is McCain was quoting a Hamas spokesman who indeed said Hamas preferred Obama over McCain for President of the United States.
Of course the Obama Campaign is going to reject such support as he has – uh – rejected and denounced racist Jeremiah Wright who Obama claims was his mentor and Pastor for over TWENTY YEARS. It would be political suicide to openly even hint publicly that Hamas has a case for destroying Jews and Israel off the planet earth.
After twenty years of association with Jeremiah Wright and a former association of Jew hating Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam I wonder what Obama privately believes.
Anyway, McCain’s point should be noticed. There must be a reason why Hamas fears a McCain Presidency and embraces an Obama Presidency.
Keep that in the back of your mind as you read this report from WorldNetDaily.com.
The foolishness of Arab appeasers at the reception of distorted half truths from the Arab sympathetic Mainstream Media (MSM) always makes Israel the villain when so-called Arab civilian casualties occur when Israel defends itself from attacks Jew hating Arab terrorists who call themselves Palestinians.
Evelyn Gordon writing for the Jerusalem Post reveals the full story that the MSM and Palestinian propagandists leave out.
JRH 3/6/06 (Hat tip to ICEJ News)
**********************************
Civil Fights: The canard of 'disproportionate force'
Mar 5, 2008 21:35 | Updated Mar 6, 2008 14:44
International denunciations of Israel came thick and fast this week. The EU's rotating president, Slovenia, condemned the "disproportionate use of force by the Israeli Defense Forces against the Palestinian population in Gaza." UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon slammed Israel's "excessive and disproportionate" response to Palestinian rocket attacks. Even the US State Department urged Israel to "exercise caution to avoid the loss of innocent life," which is merely a milder version of the same premise: that Israel is to blame for all Palestinian civilian casualties, either because it uses "disproportionate force" or because it exercises insufficient "caution." Yet media reports on the fighting in Gaza reveal that in fact, the blame frequently lies with Palestinian behavior.
Take, for example, an Israeli air strike that killed two Palestinian teenagers last Wednesday. According to The New York Times, "witnesses in Gaza told the Palestinian news media that the civilians were hit while standing at a launching site watching Hamas militants firing rockets." There can be no more justified military activity than targeting terrorists in the very act of firing rockets at civilians. If that is "disproportionate," all military activity is. Moreover, since Hamas eschews uniforms, the IDF has no way to distinguish rocket crews from civilians who are cheering them on. Thus any civilian who rubbernecks at a rocket launch is clearly and deliberately putting himself in danger - which in itself should absolve Israel of responsibility.
BUT MORE importantly, for that very reason, most armed forces do not allow civilians in firing zones. The IDF, for instance, generally declares active combat areas "closed military zones" from which Israeli civilians are legally barred, and it enforces such orders. Other Western armies do the same.
But Hamas needs civilian casualties to fuel Palestinian and international anger at Israel. So rather than barring civilians from its launch zones, it welcomes them. And if they do not volunteer for the victim's role, it co-opts them - as happened last weekend: "Palestinian gunmen took up positions in homes while the civilians were still inside," Haaretz reported.
Firing back at people who are shooting at you is also clearly legitimate military activity; no law of war obligates soldiers to let themselves be mown down without a fight just because there are civilians nearby. Moreover, soldiers have no way of knowing whether the civilians have fled or are still inside a house; all they can be certain of is the presence of gunmen.
Under such circumstances, civilian casualties are inevitable. But those casualties are not caused by "disproportionate force" or insufficient "caution"; they are the direct result of Hamas's decision to use civilian homes, with the people still inside, as bases for targeting Israeli soldiers.
Moreover, civilians are not always innocent. Those whose homes were invaded by Hamas were presumably unwilling hostages. But some Palestinians voluntarily serve as "human shields" for terrorists - and by actively aiding and abetting terror, they turn themselves into combatants.
In one widely publicized case in November 2006, for instance, the IDF, seeking to avoid civilian casualties, announced two planned air strikes 30 minutes in advance to enable civilians to leave. Instead, Hamas used the loudspeakers of local mosques to urge civilians to flood the area and serve as human shields. Hundreds did so, and the IDF - precisely because Israel tries to avoid civilian casualties - consequently aborted the strikes. Yet these civilians were hardly "innocent": They deliberately intervened in an armed conflict on the terrorists' behalf.
What is most noteworthy about such incidents, however, is what they say about the Palestinian claim - mindlessly parroted by the international community - that the IDF fires indiscriminately, without regard for civilians. In fact, Hamas summoned civilian reinforcements precisely because it knew a civilian presence would prevent the air strikes. And the civilians came for the same reason - not because they sought death, but because they knew the IDF would not shoot them.
IN ANOTHER incident that same month, hundreds of Palestinian women purposely entered a combat zone to shield gunmen besieged by IDF soldiers. Again, they were deliberately abetting combatants. And again, they knew they could do so safely, because the IDF would not shoot them. And indeed, the soldiers held their fire as the wanted men escaped by mingling with the crowd.
In July 2006, The New York Times described another Gaza battle as follows: "[Israeli] soldiers fired at groups of armed Palestinians who fought in the streets, sometimes surrounded by curious and excited children." Why any parent would let his children outside during a gunfight is a mystery. But unless these parents were deliberately sacrificing their children for propaganda purposes, such behavior demonstrates a truly extraordinary faith in the IDF's efforts to avoid harming civilians.
Contrast this with Palestinians' behavior when the combatants are not Israelis. During last May's Hamas-Fatah infighting, for instance, the Times reported: "The streets of Gaza City were empty except for the gunmen, with shops shuttered and residents remaining indoors, usually in interior rooms farthest from the windows." No "curious and excited" children surrounding the gunmen in these battles: Gazan parents who trusted the IDF with their children's lives evidently placed no similar reliance on Palestinian forces.
THE MEDIA reports above, and numerous others like them, make three things clear: (1) Palestinians know full well that Israel strives to avoid civilian casualties; indeed, as their behavior demonstrates, they count on this. (2) Palestinian civilians frequently deliberately put themselves in the line of fire - either to help the combatants, or, like those "excited children," merely to cheer them on. (3) Palestinian terror groups deliberately foster casualties among their own civilians: Not only do they not discourage civilians from entering combat zones; they force them to do so - for instance, by invading civilian homes - when there are no volunteers.
In short, Palestinian civilian casualties usually result not from "disproportionate force" or "insufficient caution" by the IDF, but from Palestinian behavior, on the part of both civilians and terrorists.
But of course, realizing this would require actually reading reports of the fighting. It is much easier just to skim the headlines and issue stock condemnations of Israel.
__________________________
© 1995 – 2007 [sic] The Jerusalem Post. All rights reserved.
I had the impression Ron Paul was a Libertarian Republican with disastrous a Foreign Policy platform. I had heard the rumors that Paul was receiving big chunks of money from White Supremacist hate groups but I merely chalked that up to something yet awkwardly the racist hate groups liked about Paul.
I did think it was odd that Paul did not give the money back so as not to be publicly associated with racist hate groups. I naively chalked that up to a budget need to compete with the tier one big boys of the GOP.
I am finding out just how naïve I really was. From an odd named blog (FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blog) that bill’s itself as “FullosseousFlap’s Comments on the Dental World and More.” The “and More” seems to reign over comments on the Dental World for FullosseousFlap spends a great deal more time blogging on Conservative issues.
Anyway the blog has found credible dirt on Ron Paul that has him printing newsletters that are of a White Supremacist anti-Semitic nature. That places Ron Paul in the category of hypocrite trying to fool mainstream Republicans with a Libertarian bent. It is heinous! It is embarrassing! It is like when KKK David Duke ran for office in Louisiana as a Republican.
Do not be fooled by Ron Paul’s overtly Libertarian ways when he is quietly and inwardly a White Supremacist.
*********************
RON PAUL WATCH: THE BIGOT REVOLUTION
Flap
January 8, 2008 1:39 PM
Why is THIS news? It was a matter of time before someone found the historical Ron Paul written record.
Flap has pounded Ron Paul for weeks over his Donald Black, David Duke and Stormfront.org (White Supremacist/Neo-Nazi) ties - his Jew problem.
But, here are some key graphs:
· Such views on race also inflected the newsletters’ commentary on foreign affairs. South Africa’s transition to multiracial democracy was portrayed as a “destruction of civilization” that was “the most tragic [to] ever occur on that continent, at least below the Sahara”; and, in March 1994, a month before Nelson Mandela was elected president, one item warned of an impending “South African Holocaust.”
· Martin Luther King Jr. earned special ire from Paul’s newsletters, which attacked the civil rights leader frequently, often to justify opposition to the federal holiday named after him. (”What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!” one newsletter complained in 1990. “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”) In the early 1990s, a newsletter attacked the “X-Rated Martin Luther King” as a “world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,” “seduced underage girls and boys,” and “made a pass at” fellow civil rights leader Ralph Abernathy. One newsletter ridiculed black activists who wanted to rename New York City after King, suggesting that “Welfaria,” “Zooville,” “Rapetown,” “Dirtburg,” and “Lazyopolis” were better alternatives. The same year, King was described as “a comsymp, if not an actual party member, and the man who replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration.”
On the Jews and Israel:
· The newsletters display an obsession with Israel; no other country is mentioned more often in the editions I saw, or with more vitriol. A 1987 issue of Paul’s Investment Letter called Israel “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and a 1990 newsletter discussed the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.” Of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a newsletter said, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.”
Ron Paul’s spokesman, Jesse Barton denies Ron Paul’s direct involvement in many of the newsletters which carry Ron Paul’s name and where many bigoted quotes are found.
Who are they trying to fool?
But it is difficult to imagine how Paul could allow material consistently saturated in racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and conspiracy-mongering to be printed under his name for so long if he did not share these views. In that respect, whether or not Paul personally wrote the most offensive passages is almost beside the point. If he disagreed with what was being written under his name, you would think that at some point–over the course of decades–he would have done something about it.
The Ron Paul Revolution is a RUSE. It’s origins are not in libertarianism but the FAR RIGHT hate crowd.
__________________
Update for my blog from Flap:
Comment by Wiseburn
2008-01-08 16:53:14
Flap,
Yes, I read the TNR article and scanned Pajamas. I’ve followed Paul’s voting record in Congress for years. He is a polite, honest, straight talking country doctor with utmost integrity and my favorite Congressman.
Here is Paul’s statement on this flap.
January 8, 2008 5:28 am EST
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:
“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.
“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person’s character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’
“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It’s once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.
“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”
My Response:
Come on Paul! You say, “I have publically taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.” That is a lot of Newsletters for you not to pay attention. That makes you a moron not fit to be President or liar not fit to be President.
Freedom of Speech and the Press is a Liberty and Right enjoyed in America. It so enjoyed that the good, the bad and the ugly are allowed to be publish as long as there is no libelous material in the publication. Thus pressure from the Left has stroked Free Speech and Free Press to allow malevolent publications as porn and racism (KKK stuff for example). Even here a gray line is drawn in the sand. Explicit wicked porn is publishable, yet kiddie porn is illegal.
I personally do not know the where the line is drawn on racism or hate, but I know you can find a copy of Hitler’s Mein Kampf in your Public Library.
Thus Liberty enables both the good and the bad within the confines of the rule of law.
Now let us look at a nation like Egypt. It is a State that is highly influenced by Mohammedanism. At first glance Egypt’s legal system is based “…on English common law, Islamic law and Napoleonic codes.” (Egypt Information and Facts)
I suspect Islamic law (more than likely sharia law) is the dominant legal reference even thought well over 20% of Egypt’s population are Coptic Christians. Egypt is a dictatorship in which one man calls the shots. There is no Liberty or freedom in Egypt. You can go to jail for criticizing the government or Mohammedanism.
Egypt has an International Annual Book Fair toward the end of January running to early February. Apparently all kinds of fiction and non-fiction publications appear at the Book Fair. Undoubtedly there are no books that are critical of the Egyptian regime or Mohammedanism. Yet there are bounteous selections of gross anti-Semitic literature that is available.
Now think of this combination. Egypt has diplomatic relations via treaty with Israel. Egypt and Israel are not kissing cousins but diplomatic channels exist between the one of the most ominous former enemies of Israel. Egypt and America are allegedly allied in the fight against the War on Terror rhetorically (not militarily).
It is understandable that Egypt is on the side of Arabs calling them selves Palestinians to have a sovereign State formed. So realize this, these Arabs of so-called Palestine are schooled in Jewish hatred form the time the education process begins.
And yet Egypt is in a treaty with Israel and is working with the USA against Islamofascist terrorism. Incidentally Egypt is the location and home of one the largest transnational Islamist group on the planet. That group is known in English as the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood along with Wahhabi aligned Islamists like al-Qaeda wish to see an International Caliphate ruling the globe.
The Egyptian dictatorship (ranging from Nasser to the present Mubarak) has off and on had a hostile relationship. The Egyptian government has regarded the Muslim Brotherhood as a Theo-political rival to the regime. The Egyptian government has off and on persecuted the Muslim Brotherhood and allowed their presence depending on end goal situations for the government. To the Egyptian government’s chagrin the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood is quite popular among the Mohammedan Egyptian masses.
The thing that makes Egypt a wary neighbor is the allowance of the forms of extreme anti-Semitism to be published. As I said Egypt is not a land of Liberty and Freedom. The government could squelch the public publishing of anti-Semitic books and publications that continue to incite Arab hatred toward Israel.
Take pause and wonder: what would Egypt do if Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran joined in an attack on Israel?
I like Ann Coulter because she is Conservative who is not afraid to rock the Politically Correct boat. In her latest column Coulter not only takes on the hypocrisy of the Left’s tendency to promote an image of multicultural tolerance while disdaining Conservatives as all things evil and Christianity as an old myth which only the unintelligent still follow; Coulter makes a stab at the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as a Leftist organization.
The launching pad for Coulter’s venom toward the ADL is because the ADL has attacked Dennis Prager (a Jewish individual) for his anti-Islamist stand.
The only criticism I have of Coulter’s column is the appearance of sympathy for the implied criticism of the ADL of Senator Robert Byrd’s racist past. Byrd was a card carrying and recruiting member of the Klu Klux Klan in old West Virginia. (Read a Conservatives view of Byrd’s KKK past HERE and the Slanted Left View of Byrd’s KKK past HERE.) Coulter may be expressing tongue-in-cheek however it is odd even in that way to show sympathy for a slanted Left aged Democrat with a racist past.
Otherwise Coulter’s analogies are right on piercing of Leftist hypocrisy with the reality of truth. Apparently the ADL has become so Left wing it is more concerned with Leftist ideology than with the survival of the existence of the Land of Israel, a Land that owes its modern existence to the butchery of Hitler’s Nazi/Fascist Holocaust.
Can you name the primary goal of Islamofascism? Its goal is the execution of a second Holocaust of Jews, particularly the ones living Israel.
Mohammedan elites are stirring up trouble by telling media outlets that Israel is desecrating al Aqsa Mosque. It has been a lie told over and over concerning the two mosques on the Temple Mount to incite a Mohammedan outcry and attacks on the Jewish nation of Israel.
The truth of the matter is the Israel Antiquities Authority is making a bridge connecting to the Temple Mount stable. The construction is not even taking place on the Temple Mount (which was Holy to Jews and Christians before it was Holy to Mohammedans).
Personally, if I was Jewish I would blow up those two heretical mosques on God’s Holy ground. It may stir a global conflict; however the West still has the might to subdue the religion of peace. There is going to be a show down, it might as well be sooner than later. Let’s make Ahmadinejad and the Palestinian Terrorist groups happy and send them to paradise or hell, which ever one of us is correct.
See: THE LETHAL AL-AQSA PLOT HOAX
James Woolsey was Director of the CIA from 1993 – 95. This means he was the Director during the Clinton Administration. I suspect his opinions about Mohammedans limited his CIA Directorate to two years.
Here is a report on an interview Woolsey gave in Arutz Sheva (Israel National News). I know I am a few days behind in posting this January 24 article, but it is worth the read. I doubt Woolsey’s thoughts hit the Mainstream Media (MSM).
Woolsey begins by defining his belief Western style Democracies are involved in World War IV with “Islamist Totalitarianism.” It is Woolsey’s contention that World War III was the Cold War. I agree.
Then Woolsey embarks on his reasons as to why the Arabs called Palestinians are undeserving of a sovereign nation. The central thesis of that belief is the Palestinian school systems teach extreme hatred of Jews from the earliest remedial academics through the highest academics. One example is that the Jewish people, including references from the Koran attesting to the corrupt, dishonest character of the Jews. Here is a good article of a history of anti-Semitism which includes Mohammedan thoughts that are ingrained in their culture as fact: Roots of Anti-Semitism.