The Last Berber Jews As a child, the French filmmaker Kamal Hachkar learned the Berber language from his grandparents in Tinghir, a Berber oasis city east of the Atlas Mountains in Morocco. As an adult he discovered that the now exclusively Muslim town once had a substantial Jewish community. In Hachkar’s film Tinghir-Jerusalem, Echoes from […]
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/moshe-dann/israel-policy-forum-the-network-of-intrigue/ A recent letter to PM Netanyahu opposing the Levy Report organized by the Israel Policy Forum (IPF) and signed by 40 critics of Jewish communities built in Judea and Samaria (“settlements”) received wide media attention. With perhaps a few exceptions, those who signed the letter did not read the report, since it was only […]
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=280738
Poof! Suddenly Jordanian nationals were transformed into a ‘Palestinian nation, Jordanian territory into a ‘Palestinian homeland’.
Alchemy: a seemingly magical process of transformation, creation
– The Oxford Dictionary
I do not think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I think it’s a colonialist invention – a Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did they come from? I think there is an Arab nation.
– Azmi Bashara
The Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation…. The Palestinian people believe in Arab unity. In order to contribute their share toward the attainment of that objective, however, they must, at the present stage of their struggle, safeguard their Palestinian identity and develop their consciousness of that identity.
– The Palestinian National Charter
A recent op-ed article in The New York Times by Dani Dayan, chairman of the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria, titled, “Israel’s Settlers Are Here to Stay,” reignited the debate on the viability and desirability of the two-state solution.
Plausible perils
In it, Dayan correctly points out something that should be evident to any unbiased observer of the events of the past two decades: “The insertion of an independent Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan would be a recipe for disaster.”
He warns that “the new state [would become] a hotbed of extremism. And any peace agreement would collapse… Israel would then be forced to recapture the area.”
This is not an implausible scenario, given the precedent of the Hezbollah takeover of Lebanon, the seizure of power by Hamas in Gaza, and the ever-tightening grip of assorted Islamists on Sinai. In the absence of persuasive arguments to the contrary, there is no reason – other than unsubstantiated hope and unfounded optimism – that a similar fate would not – sooner or later – befall the “West Bank,” were the IDF to evacuate it.
The question then arises: Why would any rational person embrace a policy that so clearly threatens to wreak tragedy on Israelis and Palestinians alike?
Transparent trickery
In the course of modern history mankind has often been afflicted by political perspectives and policy prescriptions that were manifestly misguided, and by doctrinal dogmas that were demonstrably disastrous. Few, however, have been so transparent in their undisguised trickery as what has come to be known as the “two-state-solution” (or TSS).
Based on the flawed and failed notion of land-for-peace, whose validity has repeatedly been disproven, but somehow never discredited and certainly never discarded, it has inexplicably monopolized the debate on the Israel-Arab conflict in general, and the Israel-Palestinian conflict in particular, for decades.
What makes the dominance of the TSS-approach so difficult to fathom is that it is not anchored to empirical fact or to logical consistency, and that the Arabs openly admit that it is nothing but subterfuge.
This assertion cannot be dismissed as some radical right-wing rant. It is the unavoidable conclusion that emerges from the deeds, declarations and documents of the Palestinians.
Nationhood as alchemy
To understand how unmoored the TSS-approach is from fact and logic, consider how devoid of substance the key elements which allegedly underpin it are, such as the “Palestinian nation” and “Palestinian homeland.”
To illustrate this seemingly far-reaching assertion, suppose for a moment that the Arabs had not launched the war of annihilation against Israel in 1967. Who then would have been the Palestinians? More important, what would have been Palestine? At the time, the Arab Palestinians resident in the “West Bank” were not stateless.
Until 1988, all were Jordanian citizens.
Moreover, the 1964 version of the Palestinian National Charter explicitly proclaimed, not only that the “West Bank” was not part of the Palestinian homeland, but that it was part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. (Article 24). Don’t take my word for it. Check it.
So had the Arabs not launched a war of annihilation against Israel, the Arab residents of the “West Bank” would have been Jordanians, and territory of the “West Bank” would have been Jordan.
Of course, this leaves unanswered the previously posed question of who the Palestinians would have been, and where Palestine would have been. Let me urge patience. There will be more on that later.
After all, the Arabs did launch their overtly genocidal aggression against the Jewish state, which resulted in spectacular failure.
From this mixture of defeat and disappointment, “a seemingly magical process of transformation/creation” began to emerge before our very eyes. Poof! As if by some mysterious alchemist mechanism, Jordanian nationals were transformed into a “Palestinian nation” and Jordanian territory was transformed into a “Palestinian homeland.”
Palestine is where the Jews are
On May 27, 1967, barely a week before the outbreak of the Six Day War, Ahmed Shukairy, Yasser Arafat’s predecessor as chairman of the PLO, bellowed: “D-Day is approaching. The Arabs have waited 19 years for this and will not flinch from the war of liberation.”
I LIKE LINDA McMAHON BEST FOR TWO REASONS…SHE’S SMART, SHE HAS A GOOD SENSE ON THE ECONOMY, AND I LOATHE THE PEOPLE WHO BASH HER WHILE THEY ACCEPTED A DISREPUTABLE CREEP LIKE CHRIS DODD. HOWEVER, ON ISRAEL…THE ARE ALL FOOLISH BY SUPPORTING THE TWO STATE DISSOLUTION…AND FRANKLY, FOR ME, THAT’S THE LITMUS TEST ON ISRAEL…..RSK
The 2012 Election: the race for the senate
Posted by JLedgeron August 7, 2012in
On Tuesday, August 14, Connecticut voters will go to the polls in a primary election to choose the Democrat and Republican candidates for the next United States Senator to fill the seat held by Senator Joseph Lieberman, who is retiring at the end of his term. Much of the candidates’ rhetoric has focused on the economy – but we wanted to know more about their stance on foreign affairs – specifically, on issues related to the Middle East.We posed the same set of questions to two Democrat and two Republican candidates for Senate in the upcoming primary. Congressman Chris Murphy (Democrat), Linda McMahon (Republican) and Chris Shays responded. At press time, the Ledger had not heard back from Susan Bysiewicz (Democrat). Here is what they had to say.With this issue, the Ledger begins its election 2012 coverage. In addition to our interviews with the candidates for Senate, the Ledger’s elections coverage will include a look at the Congressional race in District 5 – the seat being vacated by Chris Murphy – as well as key local races.
LEDGER: You are seeking to fill the Senate seat soon to be vacated by Joe Lieberman – who is certainly one of Israel’s staunchest supporters on the Hill. How would you describe your own support for Israel?http://www.jewishledger.com/2012/08/the-2012-election-the-race-for-the-senate/layout-1-3/
MURPHY: I’m proud to be a very proud supporter of the U.S./Israel relationship. As a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee I’ve been at the table since we’ve made some very important decisions during a very dangerous time for Israel — and we have stood by them in the fight to keep Iran from gaining nuclear weapons, and the fight to aid them in their protection against a growing instability in the region. I’m excited to be able to elevate my voice on behalf of the Israeli partnership with the United States and I intend to be a very strong voice for Israel and being a similarly strong advocate for this key relationship.
McMAHON: Israel is an important foundation of stability and democracy in the Middle East. The U.S. and Israel share common principles and a strong commitment to eradicating terrorism. Israel has been a resolute ally, and the United States should stand ready to assist our friends to promote peace, defeat terrorism, and prevent hostile countries that sponsor terrorism from obtaining nuclear weapons.
I believe the U.S.-Israel alliance remains critical as the two countries face an array of shared threats from a potentially nuclear-armed Iran, to the expanding military capabilities of the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah. Israel is finding it increasingly difficult – and expensive – to meet these challenges. With the increased unrest in the Arab region, we must remain vigilant in our cooperation.
Maintaining the U.S.-Israeli security agreement, which pledges to provide Israel with $30 billion in military assistance through 2017, is vital to ensuring that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge over those adversaries that threaten the Jewish state and actively work to undermine U.S. interests in the region. While budgetary times are tight here at home, I support the President’s FY 2013 request for $3.1 billion of security assistance to Israel. Approximately 75 percent of that money will return to the United States helping to support American jobs while supporting our democratic allies in the Middle East.
Additionally, I favor legislation such as the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, which states that it is U.S. policy to: (1) reaffirm the commitment to Israel’s security as a Jewish state, (2) provide Israel with the military capabilities to defend itself and help preserve its qualitative military edge, (3) expand military and civilian cooperation, (4) assist in a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that results in two states living side by side in peace and security, and (5) encourage Israel’s neighbors to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. The bill also expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should take specified actions to assist in Israel’s defense.
I completely support Israel’s right to defend itself against all threats from both state and non-state actors, and I view any attack on Israel as an attack on the United States. Israel has the right to exist and live in peace just like every other nation in the world. That right must be recognized by its neighbors in the region, and the United States must encourage other nations to form public alliances with Israel to counter threats from its neighbors, like Iran, that refuse such recognition.
SHAYS: I have been and continue to be one of Israel’s strongest supporters. When I was a member of Congress, I traveled to Israel on numerous occasions, met with most of its leaders and demonstrated a firm commitment to Israeli goals and aspirations. I co-sponsored legislation to: recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and locate the American embassy in Jerusalem; support Israel’s right to protect itself by building a fence; fully fund foreign aid to Israel; prohibit direct assistance to the Palestinian Authority unless a criteria of peaceful conditions are met.
WHETHER YOU ARE A FAN OR NOT, IT’S NICE TO KNOW…..MY LATE MOTHER DIED CONTENT IN THE”KNOWLEDGE” THAT GREGORY PECK WAS JEWISH (HE WASN’T) BUT I NEVER CHOSE TO TELL HER….RSK Play Ball: The Jewish Boys of Summer take the field Posted by Suzy Iarussoon July 18, 2012in www.jewishledger.com By Suzy Iarusso ~ With the […]
www.ClimateDepot.com
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano statement: “Rep. Paul Ryan has an awesome energy & climate record. It will be so refreshing to have a VP candidate who actually understands how warmists like Jamse Hansen, Michael Oppenheimer, Michael Mann, Phil Jones, & Kevin Trenberth have perverted science and turned it into pure politics”
Nice Pick! Romney’s VP Candidate Paul Ryan: Climatologists ‘Intentionally Mislead The Public On Climate Change’ — Ryan: ‘The CRU (Climategate) e-mail scandal reveals a perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated to support a predetermined conclusion’
Romney chose well! Special Report about Paul Ryan on Global Warming — ‘According to his voting record on energy and oil, Ryan is about as conservative as they come’
The VP candidate Ryan and Climategate — He understands Climategate perfectly!
Climate Depot’s Morano Response: Rep. Paul Ryan understood that the Climategate scandal revealed activist scientists bent on protecting the global warming narrative at all costs. No amount of sham Penn State or Lord Oxburgh or Muir Russell investigations can change that. The fact is, the global warming industry pretended to investigate itself and of course it pretended to have found no wrongdoing.
‘Ryan is an avid outdoorsman, is for a clean environment & for resource conservation programs. He says protecting environment go hand in hand with our efforts to expand our economy’
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/48741
The other day on the Drudge Report I saw a picture of the actor Daniel Day-Lewis in full Abraham Lincoln mode for his upcoming movie about America’s 16th president. The portrait was of a wizened Lincoln, stately but prematurely aged—no doubt from the great toll the Civil War had taken on him and his knowledge of what lay ahead, including the Executive Order he issued on January 1, 1863—the epic and country-changing Emancipation Proclamation—which freed the slaves in the 10 states that were then in active rebellion. As we know, Lincoln was assassinated in April 1865 and slavery was subsequently made illegal everywhere in the U.S. by the Thirteenth Amendment, which took effect in December of that year.
Not for the first time did the picture of Lincoln remind me of Paul Ryan, the 42-year-old seven-term Congressman from Wisconsin who was just named Mitt Romney’s choice for Vice President. Physically there is a striking resemblance, including his height, lankiness, dark hair and the craggy features that are even more reminiscent of Lincoln’s than are Day-Lewis’s. There is also Ryan’s self-effacing modesty, a welcome respite from the rampaging narcissism displayed by Mr. Obama that we’ve all witnessed over the past four years.
But the resemblances surpass appearance and positive character traits. Like Lincoln, Ryan is a man of formidable intellect and the ability to explain his ideas with both eloquence and exquisite clarity. And like Lincoln, Ryan is utterly undaunted by his critics, who invariably resort to puerile name-calling when faced with the indisputable facts upon which he based his save-the-American-economy budget plan that was passed by the U.S. Congress.
To be sure, Mr. Romney will get my vote in November and would have no matter who he chose, precisely because Mr. Obama’s grand experiment in left-wing governance has failed so thunderously. To be specific, he and his minions have tried:
* To introduce socialism-cum-communism into our country.
* To destroy the middle class
* To punish entrepreneurs
* To gut our military
* To suffocate future generations with debt
* To alienate our most trusted allies
* To annihilate domestic energy independence
* To ferret enemies of America vis-a-vis the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk into the highest center of power including the CIA, the FBI, the State Department, even the White House, et al.
* To foster more class and gender and race warfare than existed even in the tumultuous years of Abraham Lincoln
* To remove God from American life (more here and here).
And that’s the short list!
No sporting event, pet adoption day, bake sale, or balloon ascension would be complete without an anti-Serb exhibit.
And so it is that in the heart of London during the Olympics, we have a photographic display delivering the 1,654,789,425,378th recycling of “What The Serbs Did.” By some douche named Tom Stoddart.
And these artist types purport to be “original.” Check it out (with thanks to the Serbian language site Vaseljenska.com and Draga for letting people know):
(OK, now that IS original. We’ve somehow gone from the widely disseminated figure of 800,000 camera-ready refugees that the KLA and the bombings forced to leave (Tom was told by his government that the Serbs forced them to leave, and he believed it) — to 1.5 million. And gee, yet another case of an Albanian family separated on the road by Serb forces, who lived to tell about it. Amazing how often that happened, isn’t it. In contrast, few Serbs or Albanians survived encounters with the KLA.)
Whatever.
I wonder if that’s the refugee kid in Macedonia who was thrown into the mud by a news crew because he otherwise wasn’t crying about anything.
(Fleeing Serb atrocities on Serb-organized buses, no less. Which their Muslim warlords hosed them away from the last time the UN tried to evacuate them. Fleeing Serb atrocities that wouldn’t even be invented until weeks after the refugees fled.)
By whom?
Proud and defiant is she, in the face of the war that her side began. “You will never defeat us,” Tom ascribes to her approvingly. He’s happy about the Islamic “Green Corridor” which the Bosnian war laid the foundation for. And since we’re on the Olympics, isn’t it interesting that when Sarajevo was being hailed as a “modern, cosmopolitan Western-style city” as it hosted the 1984 Olympics — showing off its state-of-the art arena “Zetra” — no one bothered to ask what Zetra meant? It’s short for Zelena Transversala. Green Corridor.
On a page announcing the exhibit appears the following paragraph:
Photographer Tom Stoddart stands at his Perspectives photographic exhibition at More London on July 25, 2012 in London, England. Seventy-eight of Stoddart’s signature black and white pictures form a free, open-air display at More London Riverside, between City Hall and HMS Belfast. During his distinguished career Stoddart has travelled to more than 50 countries and documented such historic events as the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Siege of Sarajevo and the election of Nelson Mandela as South Africa’s first black president.
So everything that’s supposed to capture our imaginations, he’s swept away by. All the pop-historical markers that we’re supposed to celebrate or be infuriated by, he’s there — to deliver a visual representation from the same perspective already served up. He reviles, and honors, everything he’s meant to. Just another swine at the feeding frenzy.
Artists’ talents were always and only intended to be of service to existing narratives. So, as people of mere talent, they’re not to question the official story behind what they’re depicting; they’re just to be the artistic leg of the allowed narrative. It’s voluntary servitude and it’s been with us in the free world a long time.
The rest of that paragraph reads:
The exhibition is in participation with The International Committee of The Red Cross for whom Stoddart has worked on their Healthcare in Danger campaign initiative that aims to address the widespread and severe impact of illegal and sometimes violent acts that obstruct the delivery of health care, damage or destroy facilities and vehicles, and injure or kill health-care workers and patients, in armed conflicts and other emergencies.
Of course, only in the war zones he’s supposed to know about. Which is why you won’t hear from Tom about the Kosovo Albanian government cutting off water supply to the hospital in one of the last Serbian parts of otherwise terror-run Kosovo, nor any of the times that the same Kosovo Albanian government blocked or held up medicine to the Serb parts of Kosovo, including oxygen for infants. (Or when Elizabeth Dole behaved the same way toward Serbs while president of Red Cross.) Why would Tom know about these things? When the media cued us, “War’s over — nothing to see here,” Tom moved on like everyone else.
Tom Stoddart perspectives? We’re still waiting for “your” perspective, hack.
Any shots of Serbs or other infidels after being decapitated by Muslims? Didn’t think so, Brave One.
The only thing more disgusting than public diarrhea is expelling someone else’s diarrhea.
Look, he even does that typical dignified/solitary/journalisty/photographery stance with the crossed arms.
A 2008 UK Guardian interview by Leo Benedictus, titled “Tom Stoddart’s Best Shot” read:
I shot this picture in 1992, when the siege of Sarajevo was just beginning. It was one of the rare opportunities when the Serbian forces were allowing children to be bussed out by their parents to escape the shelling…
(Gee, yet another “rare” case of Serbs giving safe passage to Muslims, allowing kids to escape the havoc their parents wreak?)
I saw the woman – who was very striking, with blue eyes – fighting back her tears…There was also tension in the air; the Serbian forces were not averse to lobbing grenades into crowds. [Unlike the Muslims do?] I shot a few frames up close and the picture was used around the world.
Atta boy, Tommy! He does everything as he’s supposed to, a well-behaved boy. He’ll never risk being labeled Enemy of the State or anything. If I were Goebbels, I would totally hire this guy. It doesn’t seem like you’d get any trouble from him.
Two and half years ago, I got an email from a woman living in Perth in Australia saying: “I know who that woman is; she’s my neighbour.” So I went to Perth and tracked her down. Her name is Gordana Burazor, and Andre, the little boy, is now a teenager, and about 6ft 2in tall. Through all that time, I had always thought she just put the child on the bus, but in fact she managed to bribe her way on board as well.
…
She first saw the picture a few weeks after it was taken, and then periodically over the years, but never wanted to contact me. She said she hates it because she was trying to be completely dignified. And the one moment she did what she was trying to avoid – crying – was captured in this frame.
Does she look like she’s crying? I thought that was a wart.
The interview closes with a “Curriculum vitae” segment at the bottom of the article:
…High point: “Having a ringside seat for historic moments. I was on the Berlin Wall the night it came down, and later spent six weeks with Nelson Mandela.”
Low point: “Just after I took this picture, when I was badly injured in Bosnia. An explosion knocked me over a wall. I was off work for a year.” [Good. Nothing like instant karma.]
Pet hate: “Pompous photographers and subjects. It’s not brain surgery we do.”
Indeed. You can be a complete idiot.
So here we are again: The Serbs and the Jews. No moment of silence for 11 Israeli athletes slaughtered at the Olympics itself. And anti-Serb artistry next door. And that’s why the Brits deserve being eaten by Muslims.
Finally, no Olympics would be complete without a Croatian athlete or coach wistfully recalling the good old days when the sport was Serb-killing. This year it was the Croatian Men’s Handball team head coach Slavko Goluza, who said that their win over Serbia reminded him of “the movie” Storm, a depiction of the celebrated deadly Serb-cleansing military operation by Croatia in 1995, ridding the country of Serbs, much of the dead never receiving a proper burial. “Nothing will spoil this day for us. We showed that we are better than Serbia on neutral ground. I can’t help but feel that this victory reminds me of the film ‘Storm.’”
He was clever enough to refer to the “movie” Storm rather than the actual killing and cleansing it was celebrating, putting it on a film in case of any backlash.
But what backlash? There was no mention in media of what he said except in regional news, because you can say anything you want about Serbs. Even though it was Croatians who blew up the Statue of Liberty. (How about a movie on that, director Jack Baric? Instead of one blaming the UN for any unpleasantness that happened in the course of your war-criminal-hero Gotovina’s brigades hacking 80-year-old fellow Slavs into pieces? (’But, Your Honor, you know a Croat can’t control himself when there’s a Serb in his path — and we’ve never been asked to before, so what’s the problem?’) So, even though there was a double meaning to the coach’s words and he tried to pass it off as a film reference, he was saying the victory was like Operation Storm in that the Serbs were crushed. And he alludes to a movie that defends a man responsible for so much blood, General Ante Gotovina. (Though, admittedly, even if Gotovina had tried to restrain them, he wouldn’t have been successful. Croats eat Serbs. Can you keep a cheetah from eating a gazelle?)
Only an actress cared enough to comment — if it really is Angelina Jolie who tweets at “JolieProjects,” which isn’t certain, given that there are fewer than 5,000 followers (and given that only a Croatian and a Romanian site reported the tweet). On the premise that it is she, or someone who speaks for her (and many of the tweets sound air-headed enough to be hers), then her condemnation of the coach means that Jolie by now has enough superficial familiarity with the region that she can catch nationalism when she hears it:
Jolie reacted to the statement on Twitter writing “I am shocked by the comments Croatian handball coach made after the game vs. Serbia. Some people miss entirely the point of the Olympic Games. Nationalism is not to be confused with Patriotism.”
It’s amazing what someone can pick up about the others while exacting her pound of Serbian flesh. And she’s more honest about it than politicians and media, who are loath to call out a non-Serb on nationalism, nor even recognize Serb-baiting as such, conditioned as they are to the “normality” of attacking Serbs, physically or verbally.
Admonishing on patriotism vs. nationalism means that whoever wrote the tweet is at least somewhat clued in to what little criticism has made it out about Croats. (”But, Your Honor, our favorite rocker’s concentration camp rhapsodies are an expression of Croatian patriotism, not nationalism or fascism. Why are you trying to take away our identity?”)
And it certainly makes sense Jolie would have some sensitivity on Serb behalf, given that she worked with Serb actors and crew. One also can’t forget that, unlike the rest of the world, she didn’t ignore the trampled then overlooked then vilified Serb victims of the wars, visiting with Bosnian-Serb refugee women, though it felt more like buying a free conscience to do even more damage to the Serb image by way of her anti-Serb film.
The coach’s comment harkens back to what Croatian tennis star Goran Ivanisevic said in 1993, The New York Times quoting him without batting an eyelash:
Then he discovered that, when he won, he was asked questions about the war. In answering them, he felt better – attacking the Serbs, defending Croatia. He was doing something. “My racket is my gun,” he said, over and over.
…
In Paris, his warmup suit read, “Stop Aggression Against Croatia.” Before his country was recognized in January 1992 by the European Community, he convinced the ATP Tour to list him not as a Yugoslav, but as a Croat. He returned home each time to find more fans, more kids playing tennis.
In January 1992, the tournament at Adelaide, Australia, received death threats against Ivanisevic. Policemen escorted him into the stadium… “I wasn’t worried,” he says. “The two policemen, I go to the practicing range with them. They show me how to shoot, just for fun. They let me shoot machine gun. It was tough to control, but, oh, nice feeling. All the bullets coming out. I was thinking it nice to have some Serbs standing in front of me.”
One letter-writer cogently responded, “…Maybe this makes it more understandable why Serbs do not wish to live in an independent Croatian state. If an educated, young Croatian athlete, described by you as an ambassador for the Croatian cause, makes statements like this, we can only guess what he privately says or thinks about the Serbian people. Worse, what are the plans and thoughts of his less educated and more aggressive countrymen? With such appalling remarks, Ivanisevic is certainly not helping the cause of his people.”
On the contrary. If international Croatian terrorism in the 70s and 80s — in pursuit of the same nationalist cause and killing a New York cop — didn’t hurt, what could Ivanisevic’s words do? Indeed, the terrorism was ultimately rewarded by the world joining Croatia against non-terrorist Yugoslavia. (”Aggression,” anyone?) The West has been backing radicals ever since backing radicals in all three sides of the Yugoslav civil wars. (For a particularly intriguing entry on Croatian terror, see the “March 17, 1980″ header on this page. It turns out that the Oregon-born wife of the Croatian cop-killer was hired by the Croatian Embassy in Washington after her release in 1989, and her Wiki page lists her as a “writer” and “activist.” While she was influencing American reporters on how to view the Bosnian conflict (unfavorably to Serbs, of course), the president of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association wrote, “For the Croatian Government to literally condone murder and terrorism is appalling. Our Government should sever diplomatic relations.” You’d think. But as we’ve seen, there’s no level of insult or act of war that won’t be tolerated by Washington if committed by an enemy of the Serbs.)
You can complain about coach Goluza to complaints@enquiries.london2012.com.
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/313481
I gave a speech yesterday morning at the National Press Club on the Muslim Brotherhood and why we need to worry about our government’s growing coziness with it. I spoke for almost an hour and then there was an extensive Q&A. C-SPAN covered it, and you can watch here. (The text of my speech is here.)
Dana Milbank, the leftist columnist of the Washington Post, covered the event — though you can judge for yourself whether his account of it in the paper today accurately reflects what I actually said. It would take too long, and is not worth the time, to react all of Mr. Milbank’s meanderings. I do want to address two contentions he makes, however:
1. Ms. Abedin is an inconsequential official being subjected to “guilt by association.”
I guess we’ve come a long way since John McCain first claimed that the concerns about Huma Abedin’s ties to Islamists were “unspecified and unsubstantiated.” Those concerns have now been so overwhelmingly proved that apologists have to change tacks. So now the argument is, “Well, all right, there are many connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists, but Ms. Abedin is a victim of ‘guilt by association.’” Mr. Milbank tries to make that fly today.
Remember, we are not talking about an indictment here. When people are being evaluated for their suitability for appointment to high public office and access to national-security information, the whole process is about associations – that’s why, for example, the form all candidates for security clearances have to fill out exactingly probes a person’s background, relations and associations. I don’t expect Milbank to agree with me on this point — although he certainly seemed to think background and associations were pretty significant when Sam Alito was nominated to the Supreme Court). Still, given that I specifically addressed the charge in the speech, he might at least have given readers my take on the “guilt by association” canard:
The five members [of the House of Representatives who have asked for five executive branch inspectors-general to investigate Muslim Brotherhood influence at their agencies] have not made accusations of criminal wrongdoing. The critics who say they are relying on “guilt by association” are absurdly mixing apples and oranges.
Our bedrock principle against “guilt by association” has to do with criminal prosecutions — we won’t tolerate someone’s being convicted of a crime and having his freedom taken away just because of who his friends are, or what his associates have done. But “guilt by association” has nothing to do with fitness for high public office. High public office is a privilege, not a right. Access to classified information is a privilege, not a right. You need not have done anything wrong to be deemed unfit for these privileges.
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/09/health-care-israeli-style On Wednesday one of Israel’s largest dailies had a scoop: four months ago a man from Gaza received urgent medical treatment at Beilinson Hospital in Petah Tikva, Israel. He had had a serious cardiac episode that no hospital in Gaza was able to treat. Not such a scoop, one might think? The man was […]
