RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/2012/01/20/the_land_of_obama_makebelieve
Where did President Obama go after killing off thousands of Keystone XL pipeline construction and manufacturing jobs? Why, Disney World, of course. Sabotaging work is hard work for Goofy and his pals.

_And where’d he head after that? Why, up to Manhattan for more high-priced campaign fundraisers charging up to $38,500 per partier. The business of wining and dining politically connected donors ain’t child’s play, you know.

Obama touted a White House foreign tourism initiative on Thursday with Cinderella’s castle as his backdrop. “America is open for business,” he proclaimed chirpily to the rest of the globe.

Tell that to the Keystone managers in Canada whom Obama and his State Department rebuffed — after years of planning and review — in order to appease militant environmentalists and Hollywood celebs. The Animatronic Divider robotically lambasted Republicans for pushing him to make a decision this week. But Senate and House Democrats issued the sharpest rebukes to White House obstructionism:

“President Obama’s decision on the Keystone XL pipeline is a major setback for the American economy, American workers, and America’s energy independence,” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., said.

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2770/palestinian-hero

Mahmoud Abu Rahma is perhaps one of the bravest Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Because of his courage, he has been stabbed several times in various parts of his body.

This is what happens under Hamas and the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority governments to anyone who dares to speak out against torture and assaults on innocent civilians and freedom of speech.

Abu Rahma’s “crime” is that he dared to publish an article strongly criticizing Palestinian armed groups as well as the Hamas and Palestinian Authority governments for human rights violations and the use of civilians as human shields in the war against Israel.

In the Palestinian territories, human rights activists and journalists are permitted to criticize only Israel. Those who do not toe the official line find themselves either behind bars or in the hospital. The attack on Abu Rahma was intended to deter others from endorsing his critical approach.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=254384
Why a failed policy of appeasement prevails and why the Right keeps winning elections but never gets into power.
I am absolutely astounded to find so many of your “luminaries” in the universities who are teaching the [youth] that Israel was basically born in sin. Quite a lot of the [anti-Israel] animosity in the [international] media is fed by organizations such as the Haaretz newspaper. It is coming out from Israel academics. This cuts ground from under the feet of those who tell the truth. Somebody should be putting the truth into the public domain, and the government of Israel has not done this for many years – British columnist Melanie Phillips, IBA TV, 2011.

In the first part of this analysis, the reasons for Israel’s feeble performance in the conduct of public diplomacy and in countering its accelerating international delegitimization were investigated. The causes were traced to a lack of resolve to prevail among those charged with the conduct of Israeli diplomatic strategy.

To recap briefly
This lack of will to win is reflected in the hopelessly inadequate resources allotted for the fight for Israel’s image and is rooted in large measure in the worldview of dominant civil society elites in the media, academia and legal establishment.

Their positions of unelected power and privilege, together with the nature of their personal and professional interests, provide these elites with the ability and the motivation to impose on the elected politicians – no matter what their electoral platform – an agenda that reflects their own unequivocally “PC” (Palestinian-compliant) perspective on the conflict.

Inevitably, this is an agenda that militates strongly – both implicitly and explicitly – towards endorsement of the Palestinian narrative, at the expense of the Zionist one.

Deprived of material resources and motivational drive, Israel’s public diplomacy is doomed to anemic, ineffectual failure.

Perplexing political paradox
For those skeptical as to the validity of this analysis, the following astounding facts regarding Israel’s political history may prove illuminating.

From 1977, when the Likud first came to power on a platform of “Greater Israel,” to 2005, when the Likud withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in stark contradiction to its electoral pledges, there were 28 years. For 20 of these years, the prime minister came from the ranks of the Likud.